Author: Dann Corbit
Date: 18:28:17 11/26/01
Go up one level in this thread
On November 26, 2001 at 19:34:48, Tom Kerrigan wrote: >On November 26, 2001 at 15:12:59, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>If it were one move, you would be right. But it typically isn't. It is >>_many_ moves. Say 10 moves or 20 plies. And the score doesn't get backed up >>the the _real_ problem move at all... > >Ah, here's where we fundamentally disagree. Do you have any evidence that >"typically" mistakes can only be found with 20+ plies of search? 20 sounds to me >like a number that was pulled from somewhere unpleasant. It's pretty obvious that is it a ball-park figure, because of the modifier 'Say' I expect that it will vary wildly with game phase. You are not going to get 20 plies deep on the second move of the game, and if you only get 20 plies deep when you have 7 chessmen left on the board, then something is very wrong. Of course, how you have null-move pruning operating will make a big difference too. If you have null-move turned on with R=3 and with 7 chessmen left, you might search very deeply and still miss important tactical gaffes. In short: 1. The sort of errors missed 2. The probability of an error of a given type being missed at a given depth 3. The probability that a move is ideal (IOW, gives the same game-theoretical outcome as the best possible move) will definitely be a function of the exact search method used.
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.