Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Researching after a fail-low

Author: Dave Gomboc

Date: 11:48:43 08/18/00

Go up one level in this thread


On August 18, 2000 at 13:53:16, J. Wesley Cleveland wrote:

>On August 18, 2000 at 09:23:38, Robert Hyatt wrote:
>
>>On August 17, 2000 at 18:05:41, Gian-Carlo Pascutto wrote:
>>
>>>On August 17, 2000 at 14:43:08, J. Wesley Cleveland wrote:
>>>
>>>>When you have a fail-low in a deep search where the value drops significantly,
>>>>finding an alternate move can take a very long time. This is largely because >the
>>>>values in the hash table are largely useless, so in effect we are researching
>>>>the entire tree. It seems to me one should use iterative deepening, and start
>>>>from ply 1 again.
>>>
>>>This technique has been described by Schaeffer a long time ago...
>>>
>>>(Obvious question: Why is nearly no-one doing it?)
>>>
>>>--
>>>GCP
>>
>>
>>I'm not sure what you mean by described a long time ago.  But there is a big
>>problem.  If you start over at 1 ply, you don't get the fail low score.  You
>>find (again) the _wrong_ move, until you get deep enough.  When there is a big
>>score swing between two iterations, you take your lumps.  There is no way to
>>cheat alpha/beta there.
>
>You should get the fail low score, since it is in the hash table. They should
>stay there as they are analyzed to a greater depth than you are likely to get
>to.

Yes, the technique relies upon the information from the deeper searches being
present and used to perform cutoffs at shallower searches.

Dave



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.