What seems to work fine for me atm
is incrementing counters in two separate tables:
(a) standard 'history' table for 'good' moves (either a beta cutoff or local maximum of an all-node)
(b) a 'blunder' table for most moves which are worse by BLUNDER_DELTA centi-pawns than a current local maximum of ...
Search found 2 matches
- Wed Jan 26, 2011 6:11 pm
- Forum: Programming and Technical Discussions
- Topic: Move ordering improvements
- Replies: 13
- Views: 11388
- Wed Jan 26, 2011 11:53 am
- Forum: Programming and Technical Discussions
- Topic: Move ordering improvements
- Replies: 13
- Views: 11388
Re: Move ordering improvements
What seems to work fine for me atm
is incrementing counters in two separate tables:
(a) standard 'history' table for 'good' moves (either a beta cutoff or local maximum of an all-node)
(b) a 'blunder' table for most moves which are worse by BLUNDER_DELTA centi-pawns than a current local maximum of a ...
is incrementing counters in two separate tables:
(a) standard 'history' table for 'good' moves (either a beta cutoff or local maximum of an all-node)
(b) a 'blunder' table for most moves which are worse by BLUNDER_DELTA centi-pawns than a current local maximum of a ...