Author: Uri Blass
Date: 05:41:38 03/04/04
Go up one level in this thread
On March 04, 2004 at 08:35:04, Andrew Wagner wrote: >Once again, you guys have provided a ton of useful info. Thanks so much! > >First of all, I have to apologize - I forgot to mention that I do use a history >heuristic table. Just a very simple one...if a move fails high, I increment >history(square.source, square.dest). Then I add the MVV/LA score if it's a >capturing move, and sort by the sum of those two. I had hash tables, aspiration >windows, and null-move, but I took them out to seek if I could get my move order >% up without them. > >As far as killer moves, what usually defines them? I haven't read much about >them. > >And with reference to Andreas' comment, do most of you agree? It makes sense to >me that if both move order % and nps are low, it could be something in >quiescence. What do you guys suggest I look at first? > >Thanks a ton for your help! Andrew I suggest that you do not care about nps now. order of moves seems to be your main problem. from more nps you get only linear improvement but from better order of moves you can get exponential improvement. Uri 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.