Author: Andrew Williams
Date: 02:13:42 05/23/02
Go up one level in this thread
On May 23, 2002 at 03:40:29, Steve Maughan wrote: >I have recently been tinkering with threat extensions (TE). I'd definitely like >to include some form of TE but I have encountered some problems of tree >explosion. > >What is happening is that the null move routine is detecting a mating threat and >I'm extending by one ply at ply[x]. I then try a move (at ply[x]) that doesn't >aviod the threat. In reply the opponent plays a sub-optimal move at ply[x+1] >that does not lead to mate even though a forced mating move does exist. At >plt[x+2] I then detect a threat and extend again... > >This sequence leads to a tree explosion. Is there any common wisdom as to how >to avoid this? Some ideas that I've had are: > >1) Only extend by a fraction - inelegant solution IMO >2) Store the rely to the null move that gave the checkmate and make this the >Killer move for the next ply - didn't seem to work well - still some tree >explosion. > >Has anyone any ideas? > >Thanks, > >Steve Why not restrict your search to one threat extension per line? ie Keep track of whether you've had a TE in the current path, and if so don't check for it again. Andrew
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.