Author: Andreas Guettinger
Date: 11:06:58 03/30/04
Go up one level in this thread
On March 30, 2004 at 13:55:47, Andreas Guettinger wrote: >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 Well, obviously the second dosen't work. Andy (Confused by the word 'eliminate')
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.