Author: Russell Reagan
Date: 19:36:45 01/27/04
Go up one level in this thread
On January 27, 2004 at 21:20:00, Dann Corbit wrote: >It's not the same thing. The aspiration search is in a loop. This only checks >the root at two plies less than the main search. But the code you posted still has search instability, right? i.e. what happens if the second IID search (-32500, alpha+1) fails high? Wouldn't it be better to search with (-32500, 32500)? >The entire purpose is to find a pretty good choice for the pv node if we don't >have a guess yet. > >In other words: >No data in the hash table? Then compute a shallower answer. Okay, so basically what you're doing is saying that if the re-search fails high, you don't care, because whatever the IID pv move (while possibly different from the move resulting from a (-32500, 32500) re-search), it is probably better than whatever the random first move would have been. Is that about right?
This page took 0.01 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.