Author: Uri Blass
Date: 08:12:34 08/28/03
Go up one level in this thread
On August 28, 2003 at 10:18:56, scott farrell wrote: >When you read most literature it says "to find quiet positions" so the eval >function is more accurate, and the quiescent in the name suggests the same. But >I think this is wrong, and most people use it for the later. > >Here are things I and other have put in/out/in/out of their qSearches: >- capture by LVA and SEE >- checks >- passed pawns > >And as we but more into the qSearch, in an effort to stop spending too much >nodes on it, we try: >- pruning >- stand pat - ala Crafty >- etc > >The whole idea of getting to the next ply is to reveals horizon errors and such >in the current ply. > >I have a few positions where a black pawn cant be stopped because of wrong >colour bishop, and a white pawn similarly close and supported and attacked by >bothKings and will never score a try. For the main search it just keeps >horizoning the fact that one pawn is unstoppable. (maybe I need to knowledge for >this instead of search). As soon as I put passed pawn in qSearch, it sees this >in about 6 plies, whereas before it needs something like 15 plies (to exhaust >its best efforts at horizoning it). I am interested to see an example to see what you talk about. I guess that you talk about pawn push that are not promotions. Checks in the qsearch fall into the same >pile, whereas captures are different. Extensions dont seem to help the >horizoning problem, only the qSearch. > >So it is the qSearch's job to find quiet or to stop some classes of horizon >problems? I think that it is the same. You are interested in quiet position because otherwise you may have horizon problems. Uri
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.