Author: Daniel Shawul
Date: 21:00:31 12/26/04
Go up one level in this thread
On December 26, 2004 at 22:38:48, Anthony Cozzie wrote: >On December 26, 2004 at 00:49:37, Daniel Shawul wrote: > >>Hi >> i read in the DTS paper that the main advantage of non recursive >>search is that splitting is possible anywhere in the tree. >>My quesion isn't it possible to split at shallower depth on the current line >>of search (from 0 to current ply P), by just undoing the moves made. >>If after searching few moves,IE when i get a reliable bound, i immediately undo >>the move that led to the current position with one of my threads, and then start >>parallel search at the previous ply. Or i can undo two moves back and start >>par. search at P-2. >> >>I think with non-recursive search the only thing possible is to split at points >>on the current line of search. >> >>This is like a modified PVS which releases idle processors after a good >>bound is established to search at previous plies. >>what do you think? >> >>daniel > >IMO, if you are going to do the work of putting everything in stack frames which >you manage yourself, you have done 90% of the work of getting an iterative >search. If you get that far, I'll send you my iterative macros and you can >convert to an iterative search in another 2 hours of work or so. I should warn >you, however, that by putting everything into shared stack frames, things become >_even more_ difficult to debug :) > >anthony I think i am going to try my luck with the recursive one first. Iterative search looks very prone to bugs,and hard to try search ideas excepting the DTS issue. Besides I don't even know how to make a non-recursive AB search. Pseudocode? daniel
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.