Computer Chess Club Archives




Subject: Re: Verified Null-Move Pruning, ICGA 25(3)

Author: Omid David Tabibi

Date: 04:51:09 11/22/02

Go up one level in this thread

On November 22, 2002 at 07:30:13, Gian-Carlo Pascutto wrote:

>On November 22, 2002 at 07:18:48, Omid David Tabibi wrote:
>>Because we were discussing the performance on your specific program. But if we
>>wanted to draw a wider conclusion regarding the algorithm, we had to know all
>>those details.
>>Besides, you might agree that the results you posted with fixed time, while
>>being practical for testing your program, are not general enough to be
>Howso? At best it can provide evidence that the method is better for my
>program. The same is true for you. I already posted evidence that despite
>your 'more general' results it does not work for my program.

You haven't tried enough yet :-) I'm sure that after enough tuning, it will work
well on your program, and starting from a certain depth will dominate all other
algorithms on every program.

>I don't see
>the logic in cosidering one publishable and the other not.
>To make it really interesting, it would have been interesting to also
>implement it in Crafy (or another free program) and verify the results

This page took 0.01 seconds to execute

Last modified: Thu, 07 Jul 11 08:48:38 -0700

Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.