Author: José Carlos
Date: 10:22:52 09/12/04
Go up one level in this thread
On September 12, 2004 at 06:50:50, Ed Schröder wrote: >On September 11, 2004 at 11:47:35, José Carlos wrote: > >>On September 10, 2004 at 21:35:58, Stuart Cracraft wrote: >> >>>I read, somewhere, and I forget who, about >>>if 1 legal move, extend 2 ply, >>>2 or more legal moves, then 1 ply. >>>Anyone have any stats on the effects >>>on play of the above instead of >>>always extend 1 legal move. Does it >>>blow up? > > >> I guess you read it in Ed's programming page about Rebel. He does that in >>qsearch, and regarding checking moves generation. >> I tried his idea in my private program and it didn't work for me. It generated >>too many nodes, but I probably did something wrong. > >Checks in QS works provided you hash in QS. With exploding checks hash >move-ordering is crucial. > >My best, > >Ed I thought of this too. The problem I couldn't solve (properly) was about draft. When I tried hashing qsearch in Averno (no checks in qsearch), I simply stored those positions with draft = 0, as they're all equivalent. But when I tried in my other program (with checks according to your schema) I couldn't use 0 as draft as remaining check-depth was important in order to give a cutoff. I had two options: use draft 0 and only to store a move (no cutoff) or create a different hash table only for qsearch with checks. After check-depth was zero, I used again the main transposition table with draft = 0. I tried the latter and didn't work well. I should probably try using it only for move ordering, with draft = 0. José C.
This page took 0.01 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.