Author: Daniel Mehrmannn
Date: 05:50:25 05/10/05
Go up one level in this thread
On May 10, 2005 at 07:47:53, Richard Pijl wrote: > >>Most of the time they do the same job as 80% of the time >>the best move that causes a cut of is the first. >>It seems logical for me to wait until you found a PV move before >>applying null windows rather than starting it after first move is searched. >>daniel > >I don't see this logic, but, at the same time, must confess that I haven't >tested the differences thoroughly yet. > >Normally a scout is used to be able to quickly discard moves. >There is little use in doing that for the first move you try, as it is likely to >yield a result within the a-b window. After the first move gave a nice value, >scouts are used to test if there is a better move available. In most cases there >probably isn't. >In cases that the first move didn't give a nice pv value and failed low, we >basically have the same situation. Chances are that the second and third move >will fail low as well. So why not quickly find out with a scout whether there is >a move that gives a value within the a-b window instead of searching all moves >with an a-b window? >Richard. >Richard. Well, i tryed this idea months ago. The result was not very good. My debug shows mich that the first move, expect PV or hashMove, is not easy the best move. So i had many researches that cost a lot of time. My idea was allso if we have searched all captures and killer moves and still no move above alpha, we use yet our bestmove/result as new upperbound and try a pvs, if it failed we research with the original window again. This method works but paysoff not so much as i thought. 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.