Author: Dann Corbit
Date: 11:08:51 04/25/02
Go up one level in this thread
On April 25, 2002 at 03:15:14, Uri Blass wrote: >On April 25, 2002 at 02:54:03, Andreas Herrmann wrote: > >>Hi, >> >>I want to implement double nullmove in my chess engine again. Now i'm searching >>for Zugzwang postions, which should be solved by double nullmove instead of >>normal nullmove. >>Another question: How much time costs the double null move in the average. >>I have tested it in some positions, and my engine needs about 30 to 40 percent >>more time for the same search depth. Is that normal or is that to much. >> >>have a nice day >>Andreas >> >>http://wbholmes.de > >I do not know but it is a bad idea to be 30-40% slower only for detecting >zunzwangs. > >I think that there are better ways than double null move to detect zunzwangs. However, there isn't a better way for processing them. It still gives a big speedup for these searches. Why not use your normal null move unless you detect a zugzwang, and then switch to double null move?
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.