Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 12:15:50 11/27/02
Go up one level in this thread
On November 27, 2002 at 13:48:50, Frank Phillips wrote: >On November 26, 2002 at 20:02:06, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On November 26, 2002 at 16:21:00, Omid David Tabibi wrote: >> >>>On November 26, 2002 at 15:58:06, Gian-Carlo Pascutto wrote: >>> >>>>On November 26, 2002 at 15:55:56, Omid David Tabibi wrote: >>>> >>>>>So it is reasonable that on every program starting from a certain depth >adaptive null-move pruning will always construct a smaller search tree. >>>> >>>>Don't you mean the other way around? >>>> >>> >>>Yes :-) >>> >>>Starting from a certain depth, verified null-move pruning will always construct >>>a smaller search tree than the adaptive one. >>> >>> >>> >>>>-- >>>>GCP >> >> >> I am doing some testing now. First thing I noticed is that for WAC, the >>time-squared >>measurement went down very significantly for your algorithm. And I have not >>modified >>anything such as turning null-move off when low material happens, since your >>idea will >>catch the zug problems. > >Have you tried Fine70? > >Frank Yes... and I told Omid that this is a strange case as if I allow null-move in pawn-only endings, which turns it on for fine 70 of course, things get wrecked inside the search somehow. A 45 ply search fails to see that Kb1 wins where normally an 18-19 ply search is enough... >> >>
This page took 0.02 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.