Author: Vincent Diepeveen
Date: 08:53:04 12/31/99
Go up one level in this thread
On December 30, 1999 at 13:10:08, Gian-Carlo Pascutto wrote: >Hi all, > >I've just been reading Ernst Heinz's paper on extended futility >pruning and I have some questions: > >a) where does the quiescent search fit in all this ? Should I just >assume that using a quiescent search is equal to statically evaluating >the position ? I.e. are 'horizon nodes' the ones at the end of the >standard search or those at the end of the quiescent search ? I am >already using futility pruning in the quiescent search and I don't >understand how this relates to the kind of futility pruning that's >described by Heinz. They seem indentical to me, except that, well, >mine is done in the qsearch and what Heinz describes looks like doing >it in the standard search. > >b) I understand that just storing the values into the transposition table is >deadly (e.g. having to research after a fail-low would yield garbage), and >this is mentioned in the paper, but how should this optimally be handled then ? >Just not storing anything in the ttable seems rather radical. Indeed. The more efficient your search is (so the smaller your fliprate which i defined as the chance that a node which was stored as < beta in transpositiontable now becomes >= beta), the less likely such dubious things as futitily pruning will work for you. Vincent >-- >GCP
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.