Author: Gian-Carlo Pascutto
Date: 02:30:26 08/19/03
Go up one level in this thread
On August 19, 2003 at 05:25:25, Omid David Tabibi wrote: >>Hardly. You can look for the additional attackers after each capture >>you try, in an incremental way. And given that there's not many directions >>they can come from, this is fast... > >I was wondering, wouldn't it be better to write an SEE which neglects backed-up >attacks, and not use it for pruning? This way it yields a good move ordering at >no cost (e.g., using Ed's attack tables), and isn't liable to risks of pruning. Pruning is the main reason to use SEE over other schemes. Not pruning with it pretty much defeats the purpose. -- GCP
This page took 0.01 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.