Author: Fabien Letouzey
Date: 05:33:12 03/25/04
Go up one level in this thread
On March 25, 2004 at 08:32:05, Fabien Letouzey wrote:
>On March 25, 2004 at 08:11:08, Sune Fischer wrote:
>
>>On March 25, 2004 at 07:47:02, Fabien Letouzey wrote:
>>
>>>>
>>>>So was I. You have only solved the problem along the PV. It _still_ exists
>>>>along non-PV moves just as I explained...
>>>>
>>>>this has nothing to do with aspiration issues...
>>>
>>>Yes of course it does not fix all the problems, I should have stated
>>>it. However I think I gain some "stability" (and a complete PV as a
>>>side effect) at the cost of a 1-ply search (sometimes more) all along
>>>the PV. For some reason, I did not consider turning hashing off
>>>everywhere in the tree :)
>>>
>>>The tradeoff in my design is that null-window searches can do what
>>>they want (forward prune, be inconsistent, etc ...), and the pv-node
>>>search will try to accomodate with that.
>>>
>>>Fabien.
>
>>I recall having read about something similar, namely extending the PV to make
>>sure the line is sound.
>
>>I believe the conclusion was that it didn't work so well, that the PV was no
>>more important than the refutations and there was no a priori reason to be
>>extending it.
>I have read this threat, but what I do is different.
^^^^^^
Thread of course; I don't really feel in danger yet :)
Fabien.
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.