Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 07:43:25 11/13/03
Go up one level in this thread
On November 12, 2003 at 21:02:50, Dave Gomboc wrote: > >No, he isn't. MT-SSS* isn't mtd(f). mtd(f) is the new algorithm that is better >than MT-SSS (a.k.a. mtd(-oo)). > >Dave OK. But mtd(anything) is depth-first. There is no way in a normal search a depth-first search strategy will search the same tree, in the same order, as a best-first search strategy like SSS*, except for pathological cases. I suppose you could corrupt the idea of depth-first to say that it searches the same tree in certain cases, and make that true. But not for the general case. IE the concept of the "open list" simply doesn't exist in depth-first, by definition. I'm constrained to search the tree as it is generated, contrary to best-first. However, it is all moot. I've only seen one SSS* program ever compete in a computer chess event, that being a version of HiTech. And they turned SSS* off and went back to PVS once they reached some "endgame threshold".
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.