Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: new thoughts on verified null move

Author: Omid David Tabibi

Date: 08:15:15 11/23/02

Go up one level in this thread


On November 23, 2002 at 11:12:55, Christophe Theron wrote:

>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.
>>
>>>Uri
>
>
>
>
>Initial results ALWAYS look good. :)
>

Not always; I had some ideas that I dumped after less than a week of
experiments...

>Good luck with your researchs.
>

Thank you!

>
>
>    Christophe



This page took 0.17 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.