Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

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

Author: Robert Hyatt

Date: 12:33:41 11/21/02

Go up one level in this thread


On November 21, 2002 at 11:07:39, Daniel Clausen wrote:

>On November 21, 2002 at 11:04:55, Robert Hyatt 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?
>>
>>Remember that a null move is not a move.  So it is possible that there is
>>nothing to undo.  I update the hash signature to avoid a different problem,
>>so I have to undo that as you suggest...
>
>Well, since side-to-move is part of the hash signature, I hope that everyone is
>updating something at that point. Or did I miss something?
>
>Sargon

It isn't necessarily done that way.  Some have used two tables, one for white to
move, one for black to move...  If you use one table, and hash in side to move,
then
you are correct.  But you also need to correctly handle enpassant stuff since
the
EP possibility is lost following a null-move.



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.