Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 20:59:00 01/17/06
Go up one level in this thread
On January 17, 2006 at 18:27:05, Stuart Cracraft wrote: >On January 17, 2006 at 17:47:56, Tord Romstad wrote: > > >>"Fail-low pruning" was a new name to me, but it is not a bad name. >>The technique was not invented by me, although I like to think that >>I played some role in popularising it. > >Tord - can you provide some generalized pseudo-code showing what it is? > >I use a basic PVS searcher I stole out of a very old Tony Marsland article >but would be willing to try a switch if you think fail-low pruning is better >than PVS. > >Stuart Think of it as an "anti-extension". If you trigger an extension on a particular move, you search deeper, correct? If you don't trigger an extension, then you might choose to trigger a reduction, which is the opposite of an extension, and searches to a shallower depth than usual to save time on moves that appear to be lousy...
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.