Author: Uri Blass
Date: 16:16:12 12/20/04
Go up one level in this thread
On December 20, 2004 at 18:57:54, José Carlos wrote: >On December 20, 2004 at 18:43:19, Uri Blass wrote: > >>On December 20, 2004 at 18:31:56, Dann Corbit wrote: >> >>>On December 20, 2004 at 18:27:37, Uri Blass wrote: >>> >>>>On December 20, 2004 at 18:22:24, Dann Corbit wrote: >>>> >>>>>On December 20, 2004 at 16:32:24, Jouni Uski wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>Shredder 8 reaches quite stunning averaga search dept. E.g. with only 15 >>>>>>second/move average with Pentium 2400 and 128MB hash it averages 15,2 ply! For >>>>>>comparison Fritz Bilbao and Gandalf 6 reach both same 12,7 ply. No wonder >>>>>>Shredder beats them 13 - 7 and 14 - 6. Of course 2,5 ply is a lot difference! >>>>>>Is there any amateur or pro engine, which can equal Shredder in depth - Junior's >>>>>>half plys can be forgotten. >>>>> >>>>>I can write an evaluation function that only counts the wood. It will beat >>>>>Shredder's depth, but Shredder will easily kill it on a 1/10 as powerful machine >>>>>all the time. >>>> >>>>Only writing evaluation that only count wood will not be enough to beat >>>>shredder depth. >>> >>>A simple PVS with null move and wood counting only will get 19 plies in a few >>>seconds. Is that what you mean by pruning? >> >> >>In what position? >>I never had only wood counting but I guess it is dependent on the position and >>in tactical position when there are many threats to win material it may get >>smaller depthes. >> >>Uri > > Only material eval gives much more cutoffs in alphabeta because most evals are >equal, so basically everything that doesn't lose material (compared to the PV) >gets immediately pruned. > > José C. I understand. This is the reason that I said that in tactical positions when there are many threats to win material it may get smaller depth. Uri
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.