Author: Andrew Williams
Date: 13:35:45 09/07/99
Go up one level in this thread
On September 07, 1999 at 13:54:40, Bruce Moreland wrote: >On September 07, 1999 at 10:27:06, James Robertson wrote: > >>On September 07, 1999 at 09:01:34, Andrew Williams wrote: > >>>Using this scheme, what would you count if you enter a search node, check for >>>extensions, find there are none and decide to go into the qsearch? One node >>>or two? >>> >>>Andrew >> >>Er.... I think that case is impossible in my program. :) > >This kind of stuff is not impossible using the generic Thompson search/qsearch >model. You can get a case where you call qsearch, notice that you are in check, >and do "return search(...)", which would count a node for "qsearch", and another >node for the recursive call into "search", even though only one node was really >dealt with. This of course depends upon where you put the nodes++, which isn't >present in the Thompson pseudo-code. > >I think that one node should be counted in cases like these. If you end up >counting a lot of nodes twice, you can be comparing with someone else who has >written essentially the same program, and it looks like you are going faster. > >bruce Yeah, I count such situations just once. What I do (at the moment) is enter my alphabeta() routine and check for extensions first of all. I increase depth according to what my extensions code finds and then check to see if (despite any extensions I've applied) it's time to go into the qsearch. Andrew
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.