Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 19:06:14 03/02/01
Go up one level in this thread
On March 02, 2001 at 16:01:21, Ernst A. Heinz wrote: >Hi Severi, > >>>>>I can save bunches of nodes by not nullmoving on the last ply before >>>>>qsearch. So if depthleft == 1 ply then not nullmoving reduces >>>>>for me the number of nodes considerably. >>>> >>>>Interesting idea, I'll give it a try in my engine. >>> >>>Try it severi! >>>I have observed the same thing. I don't do nullmove >>>unless depth > 1. I think it makes sense. >> >>Why does it make sense? I have not yet tried it but I don't understand why >>should it be better? Do you have any opinions? I allways want to understand the >>features I put into my engine and I don't get this one... > >Easy -- the relative cost of a depth-reduced null-move search >at frontier nodes (with a remaining depth of 1 ply) is just >too high. Most normal searches from there also go straight into >quiescence mode and the gain of null-move cutoffs does not seem >to outweigh the added null-move search effort. > >=Ernst= I tried this for a quick test. It is actually slower overall than doing null-move everywhere. A couple of positions were faster. But more were slower. I ran all the kopec positions...
This page took 0.01 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 07 Jul 11 08:48:38 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.