Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 21:24:51 01/27/99
Go up one level in this thread
On January 27, 1999 at 16:28:59, Ernst A. Heinz wrote: >On January 27, 1999 at 16:08:10, Ernst A. Heinz wrote: >> >> [...] >> >>Where and why did the term "pruning" get misused in your opinion? >> >>1. Normal futility pruning (as coined by Jonathan in his Ph.D.thesis), >>2. extended futility pruning (as coined by me in the ICCA Journal), and >>3. futility pruning in the quiescence search (as done by almost anybody) >> >>all *cut* (or prune if you like) moves at the nodes where they are applied >>according to my above explanation. > >Just a short addition: "to cut a move" of course means to cut the whole subtree >spanned by it. > >Hence, the only misnomer I can detect is that Peter McKenzie and you denoted >a depth reduction as "razoring" although the original term "razoring" as coined >by Birmingham and Kent in 1977 clearly r eferred to real pruning by stopping the >search completely at the respective nodes (i.e. all moves get cut off). > >=Ernst= correct.. and razoring may be the wrong term on my part. I spent a bit of time trying to find the most recent article I read on razoring ideas. The 1977 or so one I have, but there has been something different. Maybe in one of the 'synopsis papers' I have in my file and not the JICCA as I thought. All I know at present is that what I call "razoring" came from something I read within the last two years, based on the comments in main.c that indicate about when I added it. It wasn't something I developed at all, just something I tried and it seemed to work, after seeing someone else write about it. I will continue searching for it however..
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.