Author: Renze Steenhuisen
Date: 00:42:31 03/18/04
Go up one level in this thread
On March 17, 2004 at 14:17:45, milix wrote: >On March 17, 2004 at 11:02:13, Renze Steenhuisen wrote: > >>On March 17, 2004 at 05:26:50, milix wrote: >> >>>On March 17, 2004 at 04:58:06, Peter Alloysius wrote: >>> >>>>what are tricks for evaluation tuning so that it could >>>>search less nodes? >>>> >>>>i noted that my engine use exactly same move ordering scheme as >>>>crafty but it still search much more nodes. >>>>my engine also use adaptive null move, and futility pruning. >>>> >>>>so i think the problem is on evaluation tuning. >>>>i heard that tuning evaluation function can reduces node searched, >>>>so what's the trick? >>> >>>I think that there is no special trick. A bad evaluation will missguide the >>>search. When I turn off the positional evaluation (and have only material+piece >>>square scores) my engine is doing too many researches and the move ordering is >>>also very bad. Same effect if I alter a positinal characteristic too much, like >>>giving a very big bonus in advanced pawns or penalize bad king safety too much. >> >>If you turn positional evaluation off, what are typical numbers for >>move-ordering? Because this is exactly what I do for now, but the History >>Heuristic nor Killer Heuristic don't give very nice move-ordering %'s! >> >>Thanks! >> >>Renze > >I think both heuristics are suffer for bad evaluation especially when going >deeper in the search tree. To test the bad behaviour of a weak evaluation you >can set the rook value to 2 pawns and see what happens in your search especially >in middle-game to end-game positions. At the moment I only have the PST and Material Evaluation, and I hve bad FH-%, so I wondered if you could give me the numbers? I would really appreciate it (an approximation cq recollection from your memory is also just fine!) Renze
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.