Author: Russell Reagan
Date: 17:37:11 02/26/04
I have a question for chess programmers. I think most engines have a maximum search depth (most that I have seen anyway). The only one I've heard of that doesn't have a maximum depth is Steven Edwards program Symbolic. I was wondering if there would be any advantage to having no maximum search depth. If you could, for instance, dynamically allocate more space to continue searching deeper, and it would cost you very little (mostly pre-allocated in non-time-critical parts, in between moves, or whenever), would you even want to do that? Or is there really no advantage to be gained there? It doesn't seem like you would miss much if you cut off your qsearch at 64 plies. On the other hand, are there any practical disadvantages to having no search depth limit? I could see a potential situation where the qsearch explodes. My guess is that it's probably not a big deal to have a limit, since you might only cut off some very, very deep qsearch nodes, but a hard cutoff like that seems to be a little hackish, and not entirely correct to me.
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.