Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

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.
>>
>>Tord
>
>What has move-ordering to do with the sizes of subtrees of siblings?
>
>Renze

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.

Fabien.




This page took 0.03 seconds to execute

Last modified: Thu, 07 Jul 11 08:48:38 -0700

Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.