Computer Chess Club Archives




Subject: Re: evaluation tuning tricks

Author: Fabien Letouzey

Date: 08:07:03 03/17/04

Go up one level in this thread

On March 17, 2004 at 11:04:25, Renze Steenhuisen wrote:

>On March 17, 2004 at 10:25:24, Tord Romstad wrote:
>>On March 17, 2004 at 09:55:59, Fabien Letouzey wrote:
>>>No offense Tord, but I don't understand  why programmers think the move ordering
>>>is "perfect" if a fail-high move is found first 100% of the time.
>>Because the percentage of first-move fail-highs is easily measured?  Of course
>>I agree that the size of subtrees is important, but I don't see how you can
>>determine how often a fail-high move has a smaller sub-tree than all other
>>fail-high moves at the same node, except by searching the whole minimax tree.
>What has move-ordering to do with the sizes of subtrees of siblings?

In PV nodes you want the move that leads to the best score.

In null-window nodes you want the move that fails high after searching the
smallest subtree, not necessarily the one that leads to the best score.


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.