Author: Alessandro Scotti
Date: 15:04:31 01/19/06
Go up one level in this thread
Hi Joachim, from a pragmatic point of view, all of the strongest engines are known to use PVS (which IIRC is not completely identical to Negascout) although many authors did experiment with MTD(f) when Plaat paper came out. I'm one that fell for it BTW, and Kiwi still uses MTD(f). As for practical issues: 1) the overhead of re-searches is not so small as it appears in the academic papers, because there is a lot of extra stuff going on in a "real" engine; 2) many of the useful search "tricks" and heuristics depends on the existence of the alpha and beta bounds, and it is not so easy to adapt them for MTD(f); 3) even with an "accelerated" driver there are situations with a big jump in the score that cause *a lot* of researches, each getting just a little bit closer to the score... this often proves to be overkill in practice. I think any engine that uses MTD(f) and is "serious" about it had to find a way around at least the above issues.
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.