Author: Andrew Williams
Date: 13:56:44 08/04/99
Go up one level in this thread
On August 04, 1999 at 16:32:10, Tom King wrote: >Hi all, > >What are the pro's and con's of using a static exchange evaluator (SEE) >for pruning captures in the Q. search? My program currently *doesn't* >use a SEE, but if I remember right, some programs like Crafty and Ferret >use a SEE to prune "losing" captures, i.e they examine a swap sequence on >a particular square, and if it appears to lose material, they prune that >capture right out. > >Who else is using a SEE in this way? I was playing around with this kind >of thing at the weekend, and I found that pruning these "losing" captures >is not without risk - some test problems are solved a ply later than normal >(for my program, anyhow, and this could be a bug in my SEE). On the other >hand, search speed is increased, sometimes quite dramatically. > >Opinions? Is pruning SEE losers in the Q. search a win? I've used it in PostModernist for as long as I've had my SEE. I haven't tested it recently, but at the time I included it, it was a clear improvement. Andrew Williams
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.