Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 11:11:34 04/05/04
Go up one level in this thread
On April 05, 2004 at 12:27:50, rasjid chan wrote: >On April 05, 2004 at 11:05:30, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >Thanks, but I don't need to test yet as you have tested ! > >I think using nodes searched should be good. >If a move fails low with very few nodes searched, it probably >mean being rejected easily, so sort low. > >Rasjid Correct most of the time. Sometimes a move will have a high node count just because there are lots of checks and extensions. But I've been sorting by node counts for 15+ years with good results, of course forcing the PV move to always be at the top regardless of its node count... > > > > >>On April 04, 2004 at 22:20:35, rasjid chan wrote: >> >>>On April 04, 2004 at 14:10:43, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>> >>>I do what Renze is doing as I have fails outside window bounds, but I have >>>not monitored how often it fails low at root below alpha. >> >>fails outside window do not give good scores. To see this clearly, run an N-ply >>search and print the moves out with their "fail-soft scores". Then rerun to the >>same depth, but after searching each move, set alpha and beta back to +/- >>infinity so that you get a true score for each move. Compare the ordering. It >>will be _significantly_ different... >> >> >>> >>>Is it found that often there is no scores to sort on? >> >>Just wrong scores.... >> >>alpha/beta fails high on a reasonable move, not always the best move... >> >>> >>>Rasjid >>> >>>>On April 04, 2004 at 08:12:50, Renze Steenhuisen wrote: >>>> >>>>> >>>>>Lectori salutem! >>>>> >>>>>I was wondering how others are doing the re-ordering at the root-node after an >>>>>iteration has completed? Because there are some different option actually... >>>>> >>>>>I was doing a very simple way of re-ordering, by just ordering them according to >>>>>the returned scores in descending order (Best Score First, Worst Score Last). >>>> >>>>How do you get a score for any move other than the first move? >>>> >>>>> >>>>>The first move to be searched is the best move found on the previous level, >>>>>sounds logical to me, but what next? I would say that it may pay-off to first >>>>>search the moves that were best in earlier iterations, before searching the rest >>>>>of the never-found-to-be-best moves. Finally to have the moves ordered by the >>>>>returned score. >>>>> >>>>>Is this correct? Can I get some good advice on this point? Thanks! >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>I don't see where you can get scores to sort on. I use node counts for each >>>>sub-tree produced by each root move... >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>>Cheers! >>>>> Renze
This page took 0.01 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.