Author: macaroni
Date: 05:53:08 06/27/03
Go up one level in this thread
On June 27, 2003 at 04:54:54, Bo Persson wrote: >On June 27, 2003 at 01:00:17, macaroni wrote: > >>On June 27, 2003 at 00:24:19, Russell Reagan wrote: >> >>>On June 27, 2003 at 00:18:57, macaroni wrote: >>> >>>>What are the most used methods for sorting out the 'unworthy' lines? I currently >>>>use the history heuristic... >>> >>>Generally when I think of "sorting out the 'unworthy' lines", I think of forward >>>pruning. The history heuristic is mainly concerned with improving your move >>>ordering (which does help you get more cutoffs and in turn prunes inferior >>>lines), but the history heuristic by itself doesn't get rid of bad lines. >>> >>>The most popular example of forward pruning is null-move pruning. >>> >>>>but my main search seems to be doing ok anyway, it's >>>>the quiescence search that's having problems, with the q search I use biggest >>>>capture, smallest attacker, is there something much better? >>> >>>Are you considering every possible capture? Or are you only considering "good >>>captures"? >> >>thats the thing, how do I select 'good captures'? I can order them (biggest >>piece captured, smallest capturer), but what possible methods are there for >>checking 'good captures only'? > >One way is to look for 'good enough captures'. PxQ is probably ok, but what >about PxN or RxP? If you are *way* below alpha in the qsearch, you might skip >some captures that would not bring you much closer anyway. > > >Bo Persson >bop2@telia.com ah, so an for instance, if i'm a rook down, there isn't much point winning a pawn, as i'm still 4 points down? is this the basic idea? That would cut out a lot of really silly captures I imagine
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.