Author: Ed Schröder
Date: 14:39:45 09/12/04
Go up one level in this thread
On September 12, 2004 at 13:22:52, José Carlos wrote: >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. In my baby the draft in QS simply becomes negative, so -1, -2 etc. You can't do the same? Ed
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.