Author: Sylvain Lacombe
Date: 07:39:09 12/22/98
Go up one level in this thread
On December 22, 1998 at 07:14:27, Dezhi Zhao wrote: >On December 22, 1998 at 01:14:12, Sylvain Lacombe wrote: > >> >>>I agree; there are usually a lot of forced mates in a given position, and the >>>first one found is usually NOT the fastest. >>> >>>James >> >>Well, if iterative deepening is implemented, it will find the fastest mate. If a >>mate his found at deep 4, their his no reason to continue the search cause there >>is nothing better than mate. But you need a condition for it to stop. >> >>The only thing i can think of for not implementing the PV play is the extra code >>it takes. >> >>Sylvain. > >The things are a little complicated than that , because of extensions >and null moves. You may find a mate in 6 at depth = 4. But if you continue >the search, you got a mate in 5 at depth = 5. > >Dezhi Zhao You bet it's complicated, that's why i like it so much. :) How deeper the extensions might go? I didn't implement the null move or the extensions yet. If a mate is returned from an extension, can you rely on that? What you say above, is you get a mate in 6 at depth = 4 and then you get mate by the opposite side at depth = 5, right? Does that mean that you can't stop at depth = 4. If the search got to stop because of the time, ain't it dangerous to have taken a move that the search says mate for the engine and actually it's a mate for the opponent? I don't get it! Sylvain.
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.