Alpha-Emanuel-Beta Search -- Enormous Improvement of Alpha-Beta!

[Henk]

So what is the novelty. We already know that one can skip any move if one already has a bestMove.
So any algoritm using bestMove may be correct but may be inferior because quality of bestMove from previous iteration may be degenerated.

We also know that a search can deal with correct results when results are researched giving correct results and incorrect results are not propagated.

[Henk]

We also know that a search can deal with incorrect results when results are researched giving correct results and incorrect results are not propagated.

Also when a search giving an incorrect value but worse than best value it won't get noticed if incorrect value is not stored and reused later on.

[Henk]

So you need to proof that your search algorithm gives better results than some other search algorithm, somehow.

[Ras]

Ok.. so you understand my algorithm? Can you tell the others?

You have just re-invented the Shannon B type strategy from 1949. Alpha-Beta engines do implement a mix of Shannon A (brute force) and Shannon B (selective search), it's called alpha-beta with extensions and unsafe pruning, plus quiescence which is also selective.

The obvious problem for player A is coming up with such heuristics that would actually find so good moves without search tree that this would be superior to search. Since this also would include the root position, player A wouldn't need any search tree at all. That's circular logic because it means that we don't have to search if we have the best move already. Well yeah, but we don't, which is why we search.

The one case where we do have a very likely best move is with a hash table hit. Either its depth draft is sufficient, then we can stop search there, or it isn't, and then the returned hash move is very likely a cut-off (90% from my measurement).

[Cardoso]

Can't wait for Emanuel's Neural Networks - Enormous Improvements over NNUE and deep CNNs.

Watch out you just might get it.

[R. Tomasi]

Can't wait for Emanuel's Neural Networks - Enormous Improvements over NNUE and deep CNNs.

Watch out you just might get it.

I think the proper term is "Neural Emanuel Networks"...

[Cardoso]

How about you take this idea, and add it to an existing engine, to demonstrate that 1. It works, and 2. Its not terrible

Sure, I can do it tomorrow.

Emanuereal.

Just out of curiosity are you of portuguese or spanish language origins?
And are you by any chance related to "father" the famous anti computer chess player?

[Mike Sherwin]

I got +200 ELO !!!
Many thanks!

I assume that you understand the algorithm and are not making a joke. But, then why is your comment being ignored? If it is just a joke then why haven't you got a "nice one" or "lol". And if you are not joking ... ? I feel like a fish watching a shiny object skimming across the surface of the water. Can you please explain?

[tcusr]

I got +200 ELO !!!
Many thanks!

I assume that you understand the algorithm and are not making a joke. But, then why is your comment being ignored? If it is just a joke then why haven't you got a "nice one" or "lol". And if you are not joking ... ? I feel like a fish watching a shiny object skimming across the surface of the water. Can you please explain?

i think he's joking

[Mike Sherwin]

Okay, I can see how a form of this idea can work. It is white to move and we are about to call for a 40 ply deep search. We also have a best move from ply depth 39. We like that move because it is good enough. Therefore we only need to know that there is no deep tactic that ruins that move. So we only need to search that one move to depth 40. Then we need to search all black moves to try to find a refutation. Next we only need to search one white move. Etc. How we get that one white move to try can be from the hashtable or just a guess. Only if the one white move fails does it revert back to being pure AB. What if at any depth remaining there is no obviously best move? Then do a more shallow search to find one.

The whole idea boils down to good enough for one side. Now we have to define good enough. Good enough has to be better than two moves earlier or we can end up not making progress.

Logically AB is looking for the truth of the position and the absolute best move. Therefore Emanuel not looking for absolute truth could reduce the search tree immensely just by looking for good enough. The ELO gain if there is one would come from searching a good enough move far deeper to make sure it really is good enough!