Author: Bob Durrett
Date: 12:17:32 01/16/04
Go up one level in this thread
On January 16, 2004 at 14:38:33, KarinsDad wrote: >I think a good time management function would take into account the amount of >time remaining, the evaluation of the current position, the amount of material >(especially non-pawns) remaining on the board, and the average number of moves >per half ply. > >Being up a knight in the opening (once out of book) might equate to the same >overall evaluation as in the endgame (pre getting into egtbs), but a program >might be able to use less time to search in the endgame, the programmer knowing >that even second or third best moves will probably end up in the same overall >result (i.e. winning or losing the game). For example, KNPKP is hard for the >advantaged side to draw or lose the majority of the time even without an egtb. > >The converse is also partially true. The fewer pawns on the board, the more >legal moves (as long as there are multiple major pieces on the board) and hence, >the more nodes to search per half ply. > >It would seem that the best use of time is to search more when there are more >possibilities and to decrease those number of possibilities whenever possible as >long as the program is still making very good moves (especially when winning), >just as insurance. It seems to me that the above is some good thinking on this topic. Two details: (1) How to take into account non-engine time usage? Example: tablebases (2) If behind on the clock, how to get caught up before it's too late? [or does it really matter if behind?] Bob D.
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.