Author: Uri Blass
Date: 14:48:25 07/15/04
Go up one level in this thread
On July 15, 2004 at 16:59:14, Dieter Buerssner wrote:
>On July 15, 2004 at 16:43:39, Andrew Dados wrote:
>
>>This above has some implication in replacing schema for transposition table:
>>always replace FL nodes with FH nodes for same remaining depth ('draft') because
>>FL nodes are less costly to compute (cost of FH at depth=d is close to cost of
>>FL at d+1).
>
>Interesting idea. But I am not sure, if it is correct. Assume remaining depth 2
>and average of 40 moves, no extensions, pruning, qsearch. In FH node, you search
>one move, its 40 children, which then will call one eval.
So you search 80 nodes(40 children and for every child one child of
it that produce fail high).
In FL node, you search
>40 moves, each time one child, which will call one eval. Not?
If you start with the right move that cause the node to fail high you need to
search only 40 childs of that move so you search 41 nodes that is less than 80
nodes.
Uri
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.