Author: Bruce Cleaver

Date: 04:49:56 02/15/04

Go up one level in this thread

On February 14, 2004 at 22:43:19, Russell Reagan wrote: >On February 14, 2004 at 20:15:58, Bruce Cleaver wrote: > >>"Why not use a logarithmic scale based on the difference between the best >>possible move and the move under consideration?" >> >>Ron Rivest (he is the "R" in the RSA encryption algorithm) wrote a chess >>algorithm called min-max approximation, which computes the first derivative >>(really!!) of the score's change as a means to shape the search. It has >>somewhat the same flavor as your idea. >> >>It is really beautiful, but has two flaws: it is a best-first searcher >>(therefore exponential in memory), and heavily involves floating-point calcs. >>The first objection can be overcome in the standard way, but not the second. > >Why can't the use of floating point calculations be overcome? The use of floating point is intrinsic to the algorithm, involving exponentiation & division. IF you mean some sort of processor substitiution or hardware trick to speed up FP calcs, well that might be possible. You really ought to read the paper, Rivest had a beautiful idea.

- Re: not using nullmove? [generalized null move]
**Russell Reagan***09:20:47 02/15/04*- Re: not using nullmove? [generalized null move]
**Dann Corbit***10:04:10 02/15/04*

- Re: not using nullmove? [generalized null move]

This page took 0.02 seconds to execute

Last modified: Thu, 07 Jul 11 08:48:38 -0700

Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.