The subject says it all!
Not tried this, is it worth a punt?
LMR at root of search tree - worthwhile?
Moderators: hgm, Rebel, chrisw
-
- Posts: 327
- Joined: Sat Mar 27, 2010 7:15 pm
-
- Posts: 27808
- Joined: Fri Mar 10, 2006 10:06 am
- Location: Amsterdam
- Full name: H G Muller
Re: LMR at root of search tree - worthwhile?
I never was able to measure any benefit from LMR in the first place. I always have done it in the root. It never occurred to me to treat the root differently from any other node.
-
- Posts: 613
- Joined: Sun Jan 18, 2009 7:03 am
Re: LMR at root of search tree - worthwhile?
Stockfish gained ~15 elo we started to use LMR at the root.
Joona Kiiski
-
- Posts: 454
- Joined: Sat Apr 04, 2009 6:44 pm
- Location: Bulgaria
Re: LMR at root of search tree - worthwhile?
Opposite, for me LMR always worked very well but never at the root. I remember trying it at the root with absolutely no success. It's not necessary however to fail for you as well. Give it a try and post the results, would you.
P.S. if the gain is 15 elo, as Joona said, probably I wasn't able to measure it since I trow it out to soon. Who knows.
P.S. if the gain is 15 elo, as Joona said, probably I wasn't able to measure it since I trow it out to soon. Who knows.
-
- Posts: 292
- Joined: Tue Jul 07, 2009 4:56 am
Re: LMR at root of search tree - worthwhile?
In Daydreamer it gave me a statistically insignificant positive result (<10 elo). I kept it in because I like to treat root nodes similarly to interior nodes unless there is a compelling reason not to.
-
- Posts: 4185
- Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2006 11:34 am
- Location: Ethiopia
Re: LMR at root of search tree - worthwhile?
I got small improvement from it.
Caution : Root move ordering could be messed up if you use nodes count to sort the moves. I had this bug http://talkchess.com/forum/viewtopic.ph ... ht=#334554
Sorting on the cummulative nodes count from all the previous iterations (instead of just the previous one) solved this problem.
Caution : Root move ordering could be messed up if you use nodes count to sort the moves. I had this bug http://talkchess.com/forum/viewtopic.ph ... ht=#334554
Sorting on the cummulative nodes count from all the previous iterations (instead of just the previous one) solved this problem.
-
- Posts: 20943
- Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2006 7:30 pm
- Location: Birmingham, AL
Re: LMR at root of search tree - worthwhile?
Been using it at _all_ nodes in the tree since I started. It has a bigger impact at the root since the resulting sub-trees are all very deep. Not sure why you would want to do it at 2 and up but not at 1. There are lousy moves at the root that can safely be reduced.silentshark wrote:The subject says it all!
Not tried this, is it worth a punt?
-
- Posts: 20943
- Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2006 7:30 pm
- Location: Birmingham, AL
Re: LMR at root of search tree - worthwhile?
Note that the "L" in LMR means "late". I would likely not want to reduce the second move I search, which could be the previous best move.Daniel Shawul wrote:I got small improvement from it.
Caution : Root move ordering could be messed up if you use nodes count to sort the moves. I had this bug http://talkchess.com/forum/viewtopic.ph ... ht=#334554
Sorting on the cummulative nodes count from all the previous iterations (instead of just the previous one) solved this problem.
-
- Posts: 27808
- Joined: Fri Mar 10, 2006 10:06 am
- Location: Amsterdam
- Full name: H G Muller
Re: LMR at root of search tree - worthwhile?
I should add that in my Xiangqi engine LMR improved it enormously. (Also done at the root.)
-
- Posts: 327
- Joined: Sat Mar 27, 2010 7:15 pm
Re: LMR at root of search tree - worthwhile?
cheers, guys, that sounds like it's worth a try. I will give it a go and post my results. I'm still ordering by #nodes@previous ply at the root, but don't see why I can't use LMR there too.
Interesting to see the +15 elo figure for stockfish..
Interesting to see the +15 elo figure for stockfish..