Author: Daniel Clausen
Date: 08:11:00 11/10/03
Go up one level in this thread
On November 10, 2003 at 09:56:38, José Carlos wrote: [snip] > Now a position with queens on the board migh have 20 interesting moves. The >engine will be able to search 10 plies in the same time. (I'm making up the >numbers just to show the idea). > So if there's a way to transpose to a pawn ending, and the win can be seen 15 >plies after the pawn ending happens, a search from the root position won't be >able to see it. > You can perform extensions that say "if the tree is very thick in some place >then extend depth". This is done for example when in check. If I'm in check I >have very few moves to get out of check (usually) so I extend the depth. > But you can't (or at least I don't know how to do it efficiently) search a >move very deep before any other move, because if you run out of time searching >it, and it proves to be bad, you have no idea what to play. I see the problem but still think it's an interesting thought. If we'd somehow know that a certain subtree is "easier to calculate", we could extend the subnode. I see two questions here: (1) How to we know/guess that a certain subtree is easier to calculate than another one? I can see two ways to do this. (a) With reduced material on the board, it's typically easier to calculate (b) With some additional information from the HT (like average branching factor of the subtree or something) (2) While it's clear that in the given position it would be a good thing to spend some more time in the material-reduced subtree after the queen/rook captures, I'm not sure that's also the best in general. I could imagine it would be a good thing though. I probably overlooked something obvious, but nevertheless the idea is on my 'ideas to try' list. :) Sargon
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.