Author: Djordje Vidanovic
Date: 12:32:56 01/20/06
Go up one level in this thread
On January 19, 2006 at 15:01:04, Joachim Rang wrote: >Hi, > >after a question below regarding the "superiority" of MTD(F) and the article on >Wikipedia about that I decided to modify the entry and added a sentence in which >I question the "superiority" of MTD(f) over PVS since it has "practical issues". >Naturally some guys over in Wikipedia now want to see proof of my statement and >want to know what kind of practical issues there really are. So I have two >questions: > >1.) Would you support the statement that MTD(F) is _not_ superior to PVS and >while save in some circumstances a few % of nodes has "practical issues" which >make it a less desirable choice? > >2.) Could you (briefly) name some of the "practical issues"? > >regards Joachim > >P.S.: If someone feels encourage to reformulate the article on MTD(F) and >Negascout (PVS) more knowledgeable please feel free to do so. ;-) One of the practical issues regarding your second question might be that a program that employs MTD(f) can't include any large eval terms if it cares at all about the speed or ever 'catching up' with a PVS search program Djordje
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.