Author: Russell Reagan
Date: 10:51:28 11/20/03
Go up one level in this thread
On November 20, 2003 at 13:18:55, Uri Blass wrote: >I do not agree. > >Maybe if you compare only material with something more complex you are right but >I see no reason for it to be the case with piece square table relative to more >complex evaluation. > >More evaluation does not mean that you are slower in test suites and it means >that you often solve the test faster because the evaluation can tell you that >the move is good move even when you do not see that it wins material. Take for instance if you only used material evaluation. If the score is +1, then you're going to get a lot of '=' beta cutoffs, as he said. If you have an evaluation that is very fine grained (meaning a pawn might be 10000 instead of 100). Consider if you had a score of +1 pawn. In the fine grained version with a more complex evaluation, you might have a score of 10001, which wouldn't get you a cutoff (but there is almost no difference between 10000 and 10001). I think I recall that Tim's engine used three decimal places for its evaluation (meaning a pawn is 1.000), and in his new engine that he is working on, he chose to make a pawn only worth 1.00. Given the other info about his posts about '=' beta cutoffs, I guess he hopes to get more cutoffs that way.
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.