Qsearch and MVV-LVA

Discussion of chess software programming and technical issues.

Moderators: bob, hgm, Harvey Williamson

Forum rules
This textbox is used to restore diagrams posted with the [d] tag before the upgrade.
Post Reply
smatovic
Posts: 964
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2010 9:18 pm
Location: Hamburg, Germany
Full name: Srdja Matovic
Contact:

Qsearch and MVV-LVA

Post by smatovic » Thu Feb 03, 2011 5:28 pm

I achieve the best nodes/seconds while using ascending MVV-LVA in AlhbaBeta and descending MVV-LVA in QSearch.

Is this common?

--
Srdja

bob
Posts: 20642
Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2006 6:30 pm
Location: Birmingham, AL

Re: Qsearch and MVV-LVA

Post by bob » Thu Feb 03, 2011 6:03 pm

smatovic wrote:I achieve the best nodes/seconds while using ascending MVV-LVA in AlhbaBeta and descending MVV-LVA in QSearch.

Is this common?

--
Srdja
Ascending/descending doesn't make any sense to me. Do you mean maybe MVV/LVA in one and LVV/MVA in the other???

smatovic
Posts: 964
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2010 9:18 pm
Location: Hamburg, Germany
Full name: Srdja Matovic
Contact:

Re: Qsearch and MVV-LVA

Post by smatovic » Thu Feb 03, 2011 6:22 pm

Do you mean maybe MVV/LVA in one and LVV/MVA in the other???
Yes, thats what i mean.
Thank you for correcting my wording.

User avatar
Houdini
Posts: 1471
Joined: Mon Mar 15, 2010 11:00 pm
Contact:

Re: Qsearch and MVV-LVA

Post by Houdini » Thu Feb 03, 2011 6:34 pm

smatovic wrote:I achieve the best nodes/seconds while using ascending MVV-LVA in AlhbaBeta and descending MVV-LVA in QSearch.

Is this common?

--
Srdja
Why is "nodes/second" a criterion for picking either choice?
It's quite possible that the lowest nodes/sec value actually corresponds to the better solution.

Robert

smatovic
Posts: 964
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2010 9:18 pm
Location: Hamburg, Germany
Full name: Srdja Matovic
Contact:

Re: Qsearch and MVV-LVA

Post by smatovic » Thu Feb 03, 2011 6:50 pm

Why is "nodes/second" a criterion for picking either choice?
It's quite possible that the lowest nodes/sec value actually corresponds to the better solution.
Maybe....my engine plays still Blitz on a search depth of 4 so a magnitude slower search algorithm is not applyable.

...i do not understand the background why the Qsearch behaves different than pure Alphabeta concerning the move ordering.

I observed the effect that using MVV-LVA instead of LVV-MVA in Qsearch leads to an tree-explosion.

So i want to ask if this is a common behavior or specific in my implementation (->bug).

User avatar
hgm
Posts: 23793
Joined: Fri Mar 10, 2006 9:06 am
Location: Amsterdam
Full name: H G Muller
Contact:

Re: Qsearch and MVV-LVA

Post by hgm » Thu Feb 03, 2011 6:59 pm

The fastest nodes are those where you stand pat. No need to generate moves or do anything. So doing lots of futile moves (where the opponent makes you faillow by standing pat) speeds up nps. If you could cause a cutoff from current eval = alpha - 200 in QS by RxQ, where the Rook gets recaptured, that is not nearly as fast as capturing a Pawn and failing low on that. So you reduce the average time per node by first failing low on a number of Pawn captures, before trying the cut move that you could have tried immediately.

smatovic
Posts: 964
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2010 9:18 pm
Location: Hamburg, Germany
Full name: Srdja Matovic
Contact:

Re: Qsearch and MVV-LVA

Post by smatovic » Thu Feb 03, 2011 7:04 pm

thx, just found an older post from you about that:

http://www.talkchess.com/forum/viewtopi ... ht=lvv+mva

Post Reply