Author: Dann Corbit
Date: 22:30:07 08/03/04
Go up one level in this thread
On August 04, 2004 at 01:23:59, Uri Blass wrote: >On August 04, 2004 at 00:33:37, Dan Honeycutt wrote: > >>On August 04, 2004 at 00:09:10, Uri Blass wrote: >> >>>On August 03, 2004 at 22:07:58, Dann Corbit wrote: >>> >>>>In a thesis paper on hardware move generation, the author found better success >>>>with MVV/MVA than MVV/LVA for normal search (as opposed to quiescent). >>>>http://www.macs.ece.mcgill.ca/~mboul/ICGApaper.pdf has this: >>>> >>>>"The arbiters are also capable of dynamically reversing priorities, thereby >>>>permitting two different move ordering schemes: most-valuable-victim / >>>>least-valuable-aggressor (MVV/LVA) and most-valuable-victim / >>>>most-valuableaggressor >>>>(MVV/MVA). This is labeled MVV/XVA. It was observed that MVV/MVA is the better >>>>of the two move ordering methods during full-width tree searching (13% fewer >>>>nodes, 10 opening-game test positions used). However, in quiescence search, >>>>MVV/LVA is the preferred ordering (9% fewer nodes, same test positions). It >>>>seems logical that during capture search, it is better to capture with the >>>>least-valued pieces first. In full-width searching, the stronger pieces >>>>typically cause the most damage and/or board control, explaining the somewhat >>>>unorthodox MVV/MVA move ordering." >>> >>> >>>Are you sure that capturing with the king cause the most demage in full-width >>>search? >>> >>>I think that it may be better to capture with another piece because capturing >>>with the king can cause king safety problems. >>> >>>Uri >> >>If the MVV is attacked by the king I don't see hou you could go wrong - no >>recapture to worry about. >> >>Dan H. > > >No recapture to worry about but king attacks to worry about. > >[D]rnbqkb1r/pp1Bpppp/5n2/2p5/4P3/8/PPPP1PPP/RNBQK1NR b KQkq - 0 3 > >I prefer to capture first with smaller piece and not with the king > >After Kxd7 checks like Qg4+ may be extended when after another move the king is >safe from stupid checks that can cause extensions so the tree is smaller. How about Q R B N P K ?
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.