Author: Tony Werten
Date: 03:39:31 08/04/04
Go up one level in this thread
On August 04, 2004 at 06:04:52, martin fierz wrote: >On August 04, 2004 at 05:44:57, Tony Werten 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: >> >>How serious do you want to take a paper that uses a chessprogram that plays best >>if killer move, transpositiontables, check extensions and positional evaluation >>are disabled ? >> >>Tony > >to be fair, that project was about writing an FPGA-based move generator. >obviously, they only had a toy program to play with, because they concentrated >on that hardware part. so i guess if you want to take anything in that paper >seriously, it would be that move-generator part, and you should forget about the >rest. That was what I meant, sorry if it wasn't clear. My exact point was that you can't take any claims about node reductions serious. I wouldn't want to be negative about the FPGA move generator. Specially since I don't understand that stuff myself. Read about it, tried some things and concluded I really don't get it. Tony > >cheers > martin > >> >>> >>>"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." >>> >>>Has anyone else tried this reversal for search/qsearch?
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.