Author: Peter Fendrich
Date: 06:04:13 03/02/04
Go up one level in this thread
On March 02, 2004 at 08:07:57, Sergei S. Markoff wrote: >Hello all! > >I post an answer to Cristophe's posting, but it was too close to message list's >end. > >>An idea I have played with, and which worked somehow in the 16 bits version of >>Chess Tiger is to: > >I'm using in SmarThink a scheme like you described but with some differences. >I'm searching some first moves, captures and extended moves to full depth. Other >moves I'm searching with reduced depth (the reducing amount depends of several >factors, for example if the opponent king safety is worse and it's a move that >going piece closer to opponent's king then reducing amount will be less e.t.c., >I'm using here a lot of knowledge including trajectories analysis e.t.c.). If >the reduced search returns value > alpha, I'm researching this move to full >depth. There are a lot of possibilities to include a lot of knowledge here to >build really knowledge-guided tree. Hi Sergei, I've tried similar things in Terra with no success at all and the key here is, as you point out, knowledge. My program is currently not structured for carrying a lot of knowledge in the interior nodes and that's of course why these things didn't work so well. I have only kept a few features. For instance reducing the depth for moves down in the move list that never (seldom) caused Fail High. (Kind of "reversed" History killer table). It seems to improve the program a tiny bit but not much... /Peter
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.