Author: GeoffW
Date: 08:40:55 10/18/04
Go up one level in this thread
Hi Bob Thanks for the help, just trying to digest some of your other points, but this one just made me smile in relation to you first comment >>I am using SEE to order the capture moves in my Q search. >>Move ordering in the normal search is still MVVLVA as my SEE is quite slow > >This is backward thinking. Look at how many qsearch nodes there are vs the >non-qsearch nodes. Yet you are using your "slow SEE" where you use it far more >often than if you used in in non-qsearch only. :) I was just testing a position with and without SEE changes I do keep a count of nodes and qnodes, but must admit I havent really studied the relative percentages very much so dont have a very good feel for it. I then looked at the stats output line 11+ 15 2146 26800500 f4c7 11+ 315 2159 26959969 f4c7 11 9977 5979 92721403 f4c7 c8c7 c3b5 c7b8 d1d8 e8d8 e3f4 g4e5 f4e5 b8a8 b5c7 a8b8 c7a6 b8a8 a6c7 a8b8 c7d5 d8d6 e5d6 b8a8 d5b6 a7b6 c1a1 Computer's move: f4c7 Nodes=92,721,403 Quiescent Nodes=48,694,293 Qnodes Percent=6.0% Note my very low Qnodes percentage, and the slight rounding error. Cough !! Fixed that now, silly 32 bit overflow problem, but I have even less feel now for typical ratios of qnodes/nodes. I guess the point you are making is that qnodes are large in relation to nodes. Geoff
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.