Author: Uri Blass
Date: 02:47:32 10/28/02
Go up one level in this thread
On October 28, 2002 at 05:02:13, Nagendra Singh Tomar wrote: >On October 28, 2002 at 04:52:26, Uri Blass wrote: > >>On October 28, 2002 at 04:24:24, Nagendra Singh Tomar wrote: >> >>>On October 28, 2002 at 02:45:33, Uri Blass wrote: >>> >>>>On October 28, 2002 at 02:00:06, Nagendra Singh Tomar wrote: >>>> >>>>>On October 28, 2002 at 01:48:02, Ricardo Gibert wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>On October 28, 2002 at 01:17:41, Nagendra Singh Tomar wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>What all reasons can you think of for a ply 'n+1' searching lesser nodes than >>>>>>>ply 'n' search. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>regds >>>>>>>tomar >>>>>> >>>>>>The most obvious is a ply n search had really bad move ordering that gets much >>>>>>improved for ply n+1 thanks to the hash moves saved in the hash table. >>>>> >>>>>correct. >>>>> >>>>>One more reason can ne that 'n' was just small enough to deny null-move. >>>>>null-move in 'n+1' ply search saved a lot of nodes. >>>> >>>>I use null move from the first ply so there is not n that is small enough to >>>>deny null move. >>>> >>>>The only case when I do not start by checking null move is when the remaining >>>>depth is 0 or in some other special cases when I suspect a zugzwang. >>>> >>>>Uri >>> >>>But the idea behind null move is to try first with a lesser depth search and see >>>if it fails high .. >>>if you start null move search from first ply .. what is the "lesser depth" you >>>are going to try for ply 1 and even 2 >>> >>>regds >>>tomar >> >>depth 0 is less than 1 or 2. >> >>Uri > >Do you really believe depth 0's result so much as to trust it for a fail high. > >tomar The point is that I have no good alternative. If I have an alternative of searching for a big depth then I do not trust depth 0's result and I try bigger depth but when the alternative is searching to depth 1 or 2 or even 3 then I prefer to save time and trust depth 0's result after a null move for fail high. Uri
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.