Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Some questions about Verified Null-Move Pruning

Author: Omid David Tabibi

Date: 10:52:33 11/21/02

Go up one level in this thread


On November 21, 2002 at 13:05:28, Uri Blass wrote:

>On November 21, 2002 at 09:16:09, Omid David Tabibi wrote:
>
>>On November 21, 2002 at 08:34:36, Uri Blass wrote:
>>
>>>1)I do not find in the pseudo code in figure 3 undo null move.
>>>
>>>I assume that it should be before if value>=beta and after value=-search(...)
>>>Am I right?
>>>
>>
>>That is why it is called *pseudo*-code :-)
>>You have to fill in the obvious parts by yourself...
>>
>>
>>>2)What is the value of the research for tactical strength?
>>>Should it help significantly relative to searching to reduced depth when
>>>value>=beta without research (even when we get value that is less than beta).
>>>
>>
>>I didn't understand the question. Dp you mean doing a shallow search even when
>>we don't have a fail-high report?!
>
>I meant to ask what is the tactical value of the research(You suggested people
>to start with doing it without the research first and only after it works to do
>it with the research)
>

The re-search is needed only in zugzwang positions. Such zugzwang positions
occur very rarely in midgames; so you can forgo the zugzwang detection re-search
and still benefit all the improved tactical performance.


>Uri



This page took 0.01 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.