Author: Michael Henderson
Date: 10:36:14 09/22/04
Go up one level in this thread
On September 22, 2004 at 01:56:44, Rick Bischoff wrote: >Hello, > >I am using a variant of Ed Schroeder's move ordering technique described on his >webpage-- part of this is move ordering based on a delta from a piece table >(e.g., Moves like Nf3-g1 will get a negative score and be searched close to >last) . I have this all working pretty good and I have it implemented for 3 >different phases. However, I am *CLUELESS* as to what values I should put into >the queen table. What makes a square good for a queen? Usually the good square for the queen varies greatly upon the position of *all* the other pieces. The queen can easily be harassed from a central square(if applies) and the same is true of non-central squares. So the queen square is actually quite difficult to put in pc-sq table form. You should rely on killers-history entries to get the good queen moves up in the move list. Killers and history work with the eval so you can have your dynamic queen position eval in there. > >Also, I implemented a working copy of SEE now and have been experimenting with >it-- is it worth the time it takes to execute a SEE to evaluate non-capturing >moves to see if they are hanging? I don't think it is - it's massive overhead really. If a piece is hanging, then the opponent will capture it first thing next move, and cutoff quickly due to null move. Remember that what matters in move ordering is the first move. Hash/killer/history/captures are about as good as you can get on the first move -- and I can guarantee you the worst hanging move on the board will not be in there 99.99% of the time! good luck, Michael
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.