Author: rasjid chan
Date: 03:29:31 12/25/03
The QS as described in Ed's article seems a little strange. There are crucial differences with the simple QS as in TSCP :- 1) simple QS automatiaclly fails high if evaluation score (not lazy score) >= beta. Rebel's sets certain conditions on fail high. 2) simple QS simply calls QS if score < beta and sets alpha to score if greater (Ed's article did not specify setting alpha). the more controversial element - Rebel's QS returns score ( or lazy score) if score <= alpha I have now fully implemented attack tables and am testing lazy evaluation by first calling eval() at depth == 1. My current eval() is a little elaborate compared to the raw eval() of TSCP. If I stay strictly to simple QS it plays normally at about the level of TSCP. The nps is about 60000 during middle game on a P4 1.4 GH, 1/3 that of TSCP. Any attempt to fail low as in 2) above makes it play very badly.I wonder if anyone has a QS that fails low on score <= alpha and yet has a workable QS. I am not sure if I interpreted anything again with gross silliness. Rasjid
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.