Author: Ricardo Gibert
Date: 20:59:39 04/17/02
Go up one level in this thread
On April 17, 2002 at 15:43:23, Jesus de la Villa wrote: > >Have someone defined the general rule(s) where null move >is unable to find simple combinations?, and if so, which >are those rules ? > >"Obviusly" is more expensive to check it than to not >use Null Move. > >Thanks for asking > > > >PS. I hope you undertand my poor English :) Nullmove assumes that having the move is better than not. This assumption is not correct for zugzwangs, so nullmove will have a problem with those positions where zugzwang is relavant. It fails quite badly, so some care is needed in avoiding this. Not using it in the endgame where zugzwang occurs with significant frequency is one way. Another idea is "double nullmove". Pseudo-zugzwang, where having the move results in a delay in attaining a favorable result, is fine for nullmove. In fact, it makes out like a bandit by allowing a program to find a favorable result more easily than it would otherwise. Unfortunately, these also only occur with significant frequency in the ending where nullmove is typically turned off :-(
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.