Author: leonid
Date: 13:30:46 11/28/99
Go up one level in this thread
On November 28, 1999 at 15:00:19, Dave Gomboc wrote: >On November 28, 1999 at 14:05:01, leonid wrote: > >>Hi, >> >>For those who spoke about the difference between "legal", "illegal" moves based >>logic. Question was: What logic will be more rapid? After my trial, legal moves >>based logic do the best. Difference insignificant and is around 4%. >> >>What exactly was changed and where? >> >>1) Before only ply zero had illegal moves based logic. All other plys used legal >>moves logics. >> >>2) Were changed three plys over ply zero to see the difference. >> >>3) Tryed both logics for speed 8 plys deep, brute force, same positions. No >>extensions. >> >>4) In illegal moves based logic all old alignment procedures are the same. For >>instance, procedure that put "checking moves" at the head of moves line. This >>last procedure is as much big and time consuming, as the procedure that before >>watched for legality of all moves in a ply. >> >>Leonid. > >I'm not sure why you would force the checking moves to be searched first. Use >your standard sorting order for the moves. Searching checks first is going to >be bad, compared with e.g. searching promising captures first. > >Dave It is not the fantasy setting that I had in my moves alignment. In my usual logic (only ply zero use illegal moves, all other plys legal) this give big speed improvement. Don't forget one obvious fact, you must put at the head of your moves line those that lead to the biggest material advantage ever. And checking moves do right this. Not all the time, and this is where everything can be lost in confusion. Only statistics can clean it up to the "final truth" and offer us its final picture. For me, this was already done. Leonid.
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.