Author: Andreas Guettinger
Date: 10:55:47 03/30/04
Go up one level in this thread
On March 30, 2004 at 13:16:00, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On March 30, 2004 at 12:29:42, Renze Steenhuisen wrote: > >> >>Hi all, >> >>today I wanted to implement SEE, and use it in the Qsearch. My SEE isn't using >>X-ray (discovered attacks) at the moment, but I already expected to see a boost >>in FH-%. Unfortunately I didn't see it yet... >> >>Using it in the main-search did give an advantage of some 5% >> >>1> Is SEE not that important in Qsearch? >> >>2> With MVV/LVA I had about 15-20% Quiscence nodes, with SEE I have 25-30% >> Qnodes!? >> >>Could some one give an overview of which move-ordering technique is responsible >>for how much FH-%?! >> >>Thanks! >> >>Renze > >If you use SEE everywhere for move ordering, it will reduce the total tree size >by about 10% over MVV/LVA. But if you use SEE to eliminate hopeless captures in >the tree search, you will reduce the tree size by more than 50%, which is very >significant. MVV/LVA can't be used to do this since it is a poor estimator for >expected gain or loss... Do you mean by eliminate hopless captures in the tree search: - give them the smallest priority in move ordering? or -prune them in the search tree? regards Andy
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.