Author: Frank Schneider
Date: 05:02:16 01/24/99
Go up one level in this thread
On January 24, 1999 at 06:51:45, Steve Maughan wrote: >I understand the basic idea behind SEE is to evaluate the material outcome of a >position without searching - however I have some questions SEE tries to evaluate the outcome of a series of exchanges on one square. It is usually used during quiescence to guess if a capture makes sense. > >1 What algorithms are used to do this? It looks none-trivial since one cannot >look at a single piece and decide whether or not it will be captured as you may >also have a more valuable piece en-prise. Have a look at (for example) Crafty, I think it is in the file swap.c. Without searching or moving pieces you simulate a series of exchanges (every capture has the same destinationsquare). A minimax-like method is used to compute a score for the first capture. SEE is not perfect since it doesn't do a search and (usually) doesn't detect for example that a pinned piece can't move. I once added recognition of pins (to the king), but it was slower and did influence the searchresults only a little. > >2 With 1 in mind - do you believe the SEE outcome enough to back the score up to >root or simply as an indication of moves to search further? > >3 Are there any alternatives? Does 'everyone' use SEE? I think using SEE is a good idea. It helped Gromit a lot. >All help greatly appreciated! > >Regards > >Steve Maughan Frank Schneider
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.