Author: Uri Blass
Date: 22:08:10 03/03/04
Go up one level in this thread
On March 03, 2004 at 23:51:35, Andrew Dados wrote: >On March 03, 2004 at 22:14:12, Andrew Wagner wrote: > >>On March 03, 2004 at 22:09:51, Charles Roberson wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> I suggest the use of history and killer moves. Give killers priority over >>> history. Give winning captures priority over killers. >> >> >>How do you define "winning captures"? > >Really simple improvement is to put 'captures of last moved piece' first, then 2 >killer moves, then rest of captures. Don't bother with history heuristic, it >hardly works. Then later you can redo this to move all winning captures before >killers. > >-Andrew- I disagree that history tables hardly works. Tscp has history tables and no killer moves and it has clearly better order of moves than 50%. I bet that if you remove history tables from tscp you will find that the history is very important for it. It is better to start with one thing and not with many things because many things is a sure way for bugs. The way to go is to add one thing and test if it is better. Uri
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.