How come? Does this 'evaluation weight' affect the search depth?Chessnut1071 wrote: ↑Fri Sep 16, 2022 2:58 am Not sure we're talking about the same thing. You can write a specific function for single ply extension for check; however, simply placing a high weight on check in the evaluation function does exactly the same thing in checkmate solutions. It's almost as fast as extension and simpler to code. When there's plys with no checks it's just as fast.
TT management ?
Moderator: Ras
-
hgm
- Posts: 28353
- Joined: Fri Mar 10, 2006 10:06 am
- Location: Amsterdam
- Full name: H G Muller
Re: TT management ?
-
Chessnut1071
- Posts: 313
- Joined: Tue Aug 03, 2021 2:41 pm
- Full name: Bill Beame
Re: TT management ?
I step through plys 4,6,8,10......,24 until it finds mate automatically. I should modify my reply: it's equal given a set depth, extension will find it faster if the depth is unknown; however, until you get to 20-ply and above the time is insignificant.hgm wrote: ↑Fri Sep 16, 2022 8:45 amHow come? Does this 'evaluation weight' affect the search depth?Chessnut1071 wrote: ↑Fri Sep 16, 2022 2:58 am Not sure we're talking about the same thing. You can write a specific function for single ply extension for check; however, simply placing a high weight on check in the evaluation function does exactly the same thing in checkmate solutions. It's almost as fast as extension and simpler to code. When there's plys with no checks it's just as fast.