Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Qsearch Checks

Author: Tor Lattimore

Date: 19:49:58 08/29/04

Go up one level in this thread


On August 29, 2004 at 22:31:16, Stuart Cracraft wrote:

>On August 29, 2004 at 22:08:13, Michael Henderson wrote:
>
>>On August 29, 2004 at 21:38:12, Tor Lattimore wrote:
>>
>>>I recently tried putting Checks in my QSearch, this brought me to the question,
>>>should I stand-pat if i'm in check, but up lots of material? It does better in
>>>some positions if I don't allow it to, but it blows up the search as well. Also,
>>>is it better only to allow checks only at root of qsearch?
>>>Cheers
>>>Tor
>>
>>examining checking moves in the qsearch will slow you down a lot.  I find it's
>>best to do check/singular response extensions in the main search.  The main
>>search is smarter than the qsearch so you should probably spend your search time
>>in that.
>
>My program runs at about 400k nps on a test suite without checks in
>quiescence and about 3/4 of a ply deeper in the main search and about
>8 ply less deeply in the quiescence search. Predictably, it does worse
>(perhaps 5%) on standard test suites without checks in the quiescence.
>
>Personally, I think this is a good feature to leave enabled. The name of
>the game is, after all, checkmate and I'd hate to be misevaluating
>when the fireworks start.
>
>I call it "peace of mind".
>
>Stuart

Do you search all checks in qsearch? or only at ply 0? Do you stand pat if your
in check? or search all moves to get out of check?
Cheers
Tor




This page took 0.02 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.