Note: [*] University of Limburg, Department of Computer Science, P.O. Box 616, 6200 MD Maastricht, The Netherlands. E-mail: breuker@cs.rulimburg.nl.
Note: [**] University of Limburg, Department of Computer Science, P.O. Box 616, 6200 MD Maastricht, The Netherlands. E-mail: uiterwijk@cs.rulimburg.nl.
Note: [***] University of Limburg, Department of Computer Science, P.O. Box 616, 6200 MD Maastricht, The Netherlands. E-mail: herik@cs.rulimburg.nl.
Abstract: Almost every chess program makes use of a transposition table, typically implemented as a large hash table. Even though this table is usually made as large as possible, subject to memory constraints, collisions occur. Then a choice has to be made which position to retain or to replace in the table, using some replacement scheme. This article compares the performance of seven replacement schemes, as a function of transposition-table size, on some chess middle-game positions. A two-level table, using the number of nodes in the subtree searched as the deciding criterion, performed best and is provisionally recommended.
DOI: 10.3233/ICG-1994-17402
Journal: ICGA Journal, vol. 17, no. 4, pp. 183-193, 1994
