Author: martin fierz
Date: 11:09:23 03/30/04
Go up one level in this thread
On March 30, 2004 at 14:06:58, Andreas Guettinger wrote: >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') in fact, bob meant the second :-) however, only in qsearch. in the main search you don't eliminate moves based on SEE, that is much too dangerous. cheers martin
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.