Author: Michael Henderson
Date: 21:05:45 08/15/04
Go up one level in this thread
On August 15, 2004 at 21:12:37, Andrew Platt wrote: >On August 15, 2004 at 19:29:45, Alessandro Scotti wrote: > >>On August 15, 2004 at 18:42:28, Mathieu Pagé wrote: >> >>>Let say you're at depth=2 and you are about to return a score of mate in 8 you >>>should not store mate in 8 in the hash table, but mate in (8-2). >>> >>>... >> >>This is really helpful Mathieu, thanks a lot. I'm too tired now, but tomorrow >>I'm going to check this one: it looks like it can actually be the problem! :-) >>BTW, I was performing some check with Delfi 4.5 (great engine!) and it also >>checkmated with a nice "mate in 5" score! This one was a KNNN vs. K ending... > >I just implemented this last week because of similar problems (I knew the >problems would exist when I implemented the hash table part but when >everything's broken in the engine it's somehow so easy to let others in). Just >make sure you debug it with some known positions because it's very easy to have >bugs with this implementation that turn out to be a lot harder to find than it >announcing mate in 80! > >BTW, I've never understood why you would implement just storing a bounded mate >in the table. Am I missing something with doing it this way that will bite me >later? > >Andy. There is nothing wrong with either approach, from my experience.
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.