Author: Fabien Letouzey
Date: 10:55:46 07/16/04
Go up one level in this thread
On July 16, 2004 at 13:40:52, Vasik Rajlich wrote: >On July 16, 2004 at 12:13:25, Fabien Letouzey wrote: >>Actually in PVS I think of every PV node as a root. If PV nodes really are >>different (as they seem to be regarding move ordering), that would justify doing >>other things differently as well. >Do you mean that you order moves differently at PV nodes? I guess I should take >a look at your code. It doesn't sound like a bad idea. No I don't except for IID now. But since scout-like algorithms make the assumption that the first move is the best one (as opposed to "good enough to produce a cutoff" in null-window nodes), it would make sense in my current understanding. >PVS with MTD (f)-like driver. My first engine was MTD (f), and I hope that tests >will justify using small/zero width windows in at least some situations. Note >that MTD (f) is a degenerate case of PVS. I completely disagree here. I consider PVS to be "move based" (e.g. the scout assumption) while MTD(f) is value-based (at the root). Actually I look at PVS as alpha-beta + the scout "trick". MTD(f) seems very different from alpha-beta to me (in its way of scanning the tree that is). Fabien.
This page took 0.01 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 07 Jul 11 08:48:38 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.