Author: Tony Werten
Date: 02:10:12 07/05/01
Go up one level in this thread
On July 05, 2001 at 04:58:45, martin fierz wrote: >On July 05, 2001 at 03:36:39, Tony Werten wrote: > >>On July 04, 2001 at 07:01:55, martin fierz wrote: >> >>>On July 04, 2001 at 05:41:22, Dan Andersson wrote: >>> >>>>ProbCut and MultiProbCut: >>>>http://www.neci.nec.com/homepages/mic/publications.html >>>>AFAIK this is the canonical source. >>> >>>thanks! i had missed the multiprobcut paper there. >>> >>>has anyone ever tried this in chess? >> >>My guess, based on some talking with Ed en Richard, is that Rebel and Genius are >>using it. ( As a replacement for nullmove, or rather nullmove has replaced >>probcut ) >> >>cheers, >> >>Tony > >you mean nullmove is better than probcut for chess? or is it 'unclear'? in >checkers, probcut works fine. In checkers nullmove doesn't work. In chess both work, but nowadays everybody seems to use null. It has some advantages but one big problem: zugzwang. Both have the same basic idea: Probcut: This position sucks so sever, a shallow search can prove it's not going to get (much) better, so take alfa cutoff. Nullmove: This position is so good, even if I give my opponent another move, a shallow search can prove it's not going to get worse, so take beta cutoff. Make your pick. Tony > >cheers > martin
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.