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: ><snip> >>>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! > >Martin
This page took 0.21 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.