Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: MTDf works

Author: rasjid chan

Date: 09:28:36 06/20/05

Go up one level in this thread



provided:-
     R(mtd)=benefit-of-mtd/cost-of-eval-granularity-reduction > 1.0

I am no expert, but the idea of MTD don't seem appealing when we need to start
with a "guess" and then the prospect of being kicked and proded many times.
Most likely we need to wait for a genius if it can be made to work better then
PVS. Nature is not very generous. It has provided a round wheel of PVS search
and to get something more round don't help much. Maybe...

Most who have an elaborate eval() assume their eval() is sensitive to greater
than 1/10 pawn but it may not be. If there are 30 critical eval() factor, then
missing 5 may be serious. Further, who can have perfect eval() tuning. So
we may say very few can say their eval() is sensitive to 1/10 pawn.

If this is the case then mtd may have a chance. Between strong programs, it
is like a waiting game of who make the first blunder when score goes from 0.2
to -0.4, then to -0.8..-1.3...

MTD, when we have eval()/10 is like maximizing on it's opportunistic nature
and it waits at 0.2 and remain inactive from 0.11 to 0.29 but pounced when it
goes to 0.3/0.4...0.7... 1.4 when then the weakness of mtd do not matter any
more.

I doubt any one tested with eval()/10. I can't test at the moment as I have
disabled research.

Best Regards
Rasjid



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.