{"content":{"sharePage":{"page":0,"digests":[{"id":"7359673","dateCreated":"1227687848","smartDate":"Nov 26, 2008","userCreated":{"username":"Pawel_Koziol","url":"https:\/\/www.wikispaces.com\/user\/view\/Pawel_Koziol","imageUrl":"https:\/\/www.wikispaces.com\/i\/user_none_lg.jpg"},"monitored":false,"locked":false,"links":{"self":"https:\/\/chessprogramming.wikispaces.com\/share\/view\/7359673"},"dateDigested":1531474914,"startDate":null,"sharedType":"discussion","title":"must it be perfect?","description":"hi,<br \/>\n<br \/>\nif we omit &quot;perfect&quot; prefix, then &quot;knowledge at the root&quot; becomes simply the opening book. what do You think about it?","replyPages":[{"page":0,"digests":[{"id":"7370427","body":"Hi Pawel,<br \/>\n<br \/>\nmy intention was &quot;perfect&quot; Knowledge (almost endgame), and to distinguish Root and inside the Tree concerning (disc) access time, which is less an issue at the root or its direct successors to find the best move but lower bound mates or upper bound mated by the more ram-friendly bitbases inside the tree.<br \/>\n<br \/>\nAnyway, I like your idea to make Opening Book member of this common page. Despite Knowledge seems a bit to general, since eval (and even search) implement a kind of knowledge as well.<br \/>\n<br \/>\nPersistent Knowledge is also ambiguous, since it covers search results in persistent hashtables.<br \/>\n<br \/>\nI will rename it until we find something better...<br \/>\n<br \/>\nCheers,<br \/>\nGerd","dateCreated":"1227728604","smartDate":"Nov 26, 2008","userCreated":{"username":"GerdIsenberg","url":"https:\/\/www.wikispaces.com\/user\/view\/GerdIsenberg","imageUrl":"https:\/\/www.wikispaces.com\/user\/pic\/1202793136\/GerdIsenberg-lg.jpg"}}],"more":0}]}],"more":false},"comments":[]},"http":{"code":200,"status":"OK"},"redirectUrl":null,"javascript":null,"notices":{"warning":[],"error":[],"info":[],"success":[]}}