Computer Chess Club Archives




Subject: Re: Repeatability (questions for Omid)

Author: Omid David Tabibi

Date: 18:51:20 12/18/02

Go up one level in this thread

On December 18, 2002 at 21:44:09, Martin Giepmans wrote:

>>>I don't understand what you are trying to say.
>>>Without a research (if the verification search with reduced depth doesn't
>>>give a cutoff) verification search would be pointless.
>>The verification search goes deeper than the null-move search, so it might find
>>tactical errors overlooked by the null-move search, and correct them (without
>>any need for a re-search).
>No need for a research ??????????
>It's late, I guess we are talking about two different things?

No we aren't :-)

When we have a fail-high report, we simply reduce the depth, and continue a
regular search, as if nothing has happened. Because this regular search (which
can be called verification search) goes deeper, it might find out threats beyond
null-move search's horizon. In that case, you would get the correct result even
if you don't do a re-search!


This page took 0.04 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.