Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Measuring closeness to a minimal tree

Author: Vincent Diepeveen

Date: 12:39:30 04/06/03

Go up one level in this thread


On April 06, 2003 at 15:36:07, Uri Blass wrote:

>On April 06, 2003 at 15:26:34, Vincent Diepeveen wrote:
>
>>On April 06, 2003 at 11:00:25, Uri Blass wrote:
>>
>>>On April 06, 2003 at 09:55:19, Vincent Diepeveen wrote:
>>>
>>>>On April 06, 2003 at 09:48:56, Ian Kennedy wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>There is no qsearch. What exactly do you mean by 'what evaluation function do
>>>>>you use'?
>>>>
>>>>then this renders your experiments to useless, because experiments with a
>>>>gametree that suffer from horizon effects which get backupped to the root are
>>>>completely useless for obvious reasons.
>>>>
>>>>Why not measure something in the game of 4 connect? No need for a qsearch there.
>>>>No need for nullmove.
>>>
>>>That game was solved in 1988.
>>>
>>>If you want to play it in demensions that were not solved then
>>>I do not understand why no need for qsearch and null moves.
>>>
>>>I think that qsearch can help in that game and when the side that moved threats
>>>to win in the next move then you can extend preventing him to win in the qsearch
>>>until no side threats to win or can win in the next move.
>>
>>that's too slow in 4 connect. Faster is searching at 10 million nps a second
>>fullwidth using iterative deepening.
>
>I do not think that it is faster if the target is to play and not solve the game
>and the dimension of the board is not so small to do it a solved problem.
>by searching 10 miliion nps a second.

>suppose for the discussion that the board is 99*99.

Assume for the discussion it's 7x6 as it's 7x6 and not 99x99.

Don't hide between excuses by changing the rules!!





This page took 0 seconds to execute

Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700

Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.