Computer Chess Club Archives




Subject: Re: new thoughts on verified null move

Author: Christophe Theron

Date: 08:12:55 11/23/02

Go up one level in this thread

On November 23, 2002 at 08:48:36, Omid David Tabibi wrote:

>On November 23, 2002 at 08:45:00, Uri Blass wrote:
>>On November 23, 2002 at 08:11:37, scott farrell wrote:
>>>Just after other people's thoughts.
>>>I think Omid's work overlooked the adapative null move searching many of us do,
>>>ie. transitioning from r=3 to r=2.
>>>I think adaptive null move tries to GUESS where to use r=2 to reduce the errors
>>>that R=3 makes. I guess it depends on how often this GUESS is correct, the cost
>>>of the verification search, and how long it takes the adaptive searching to
>>>catch the error at the next ply.
>>>Has anyone looked at setting the verification search to reduced depth of 2
>>>(rather than 1)? obviously to reduce the cost of the verification search.
>>Omid checked it but you also reduce the gain.
>>I think that I will look for good rules when to do the verification search so
>>the cost will be significantly smaller but the gain is going to be the same in
>>at least 99% of the cases.
>I'm currently working on other variations. The initial results are promising.

Initial results ALWAYS look good. :)

Good luck with your researchs.


This page took 0.03 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.