Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: null-move

Author: Bert van den Bosch

Date: 11:09:06 08/26/04

Go up one level in this thread


On August 26, 2004 at 11:33:48, Robert Hyatt wrote:

>On August 25, 2004 at 17:37:59, Bert van den Bosch wrote:
>
>>First of all, I hope the forum will continue in some way!
>>
>>Before it is gone, I have a question.
>>
>>I wanted to check my null move so I tested if the null move would create a
>>cutoff, and after that I did the normal stuff. So if you have a cutoff with null
>>moving you are almost sure you will also get a cutoff with the normal proces,
>>except for zugzwangs of course. But this wasn't happening all the time when I
>>tested it, and usually the values involved from what I got back from nullmove
>>and from the normal process were just a few centipawns in difference. Could this
>>be because of search instabillity? If it isn't a bug in my program I had the
>>idea to search nullmove with beta-MARGIN in order for the value returned by null
>>move to bridge the few centipawns gap. And taking MARGIN the few centipawns. But
>>I'm not sure if that is correct. Can someone shine a light on this?
>>
>>Thanks, greetings Bert
>
>This isn't what null-move is about.  It will fail high in positions where a
>normal search won't, but that doesn't make it wrong.  The point is that if your
>opponent can move twice in a row and you fail high after "passing" then your
>position is very good and it is safe to avoid searching to the normal depth to
>see if it is even better.
>
>As a general rule, if null-move fails high, a normal search should also fail
>high, of course, as that is the point in that the null-move search is easier to
>do since it searches to a reduced depth.  But there is nothing to say that if
>the null-move search fails high that the regular search will not, that is part
>of the risk you take, since null-move is not 100% accurate.  Reduce the depth
>and you obviously will miss some tactical shots that the deeper depth would not
>miss.
>
>If you want an "error-free" pruning algorithm, good luck.  Logic says no such
>thing exists. :)

alphabeta :)



This page took 0.01 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.