Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Constructing the PV and trans table cutoffs

Author: Fabien Letouzey

Date: 02:55:56 07/20/04

Go up one level in this thread


On July 19, 2004 at 17:02:08, Tor Lattimore wrote:

>Another thing that I found killed my PV's was adding PVS. I was a bit surprised
>by that, and I suspect there might be a bug there somewhere which I must work
>on, any suggestions on that?

I'm trying to guess here.  I suspect you use NegaScout, not PVS.

NegaScout re-searches with the window (value,beta), "value" beeing the result of
the scout search.  PVS re-searches with (alpha,beta) instead, more in-line with
the alpha-beta algorithm.  Note that it IMO makes no sense to use PVS if you
update the alpha-beta window with transposition-table bounds (NegaScout would
result).

I believe PVS will solve your PV "problem".  I suspect the difference in terms
of number of nodes is tiny, and that PVS is somewhat more robust (think about
what happens when the re-search fails low due to search inconsistencies for
example).

Some implement a modified NegaScout with a (value-1,beta) re-search window (e.g.
in Heinz's book).

Fabien.




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.