Author: Tom King
Date: 14:09:43 08/05/99
Go up one level in this thread
On August 04, 1999 at 16:56:44, Andrew Williams wrote: >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 From the posts I've seen so far, the consensus is that this kind of pruning is a win. I'll post some test results of my program running throught some test positions, with and without this SEE pruning. Cheers, Tom
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.