Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Nullmove crap

Author: Rolf Tueschen

Date: 05:09:58 12/19/02

Go up one level in this thread


On December 18, 2002 at 22:55:56, Bruce Moreland wrote:

>On December 18, 2002 at 22:36:27, Russell Reagan wrote:
>
>>On December 18, 2002 at 21:16:53, Bruce Moreland wrote:
>>
>>>You get into trouble when you are safe for the moment, but the computer has a
>>>longer term threat that you can't escape.  The short depth null-move search
>>>won't detect the threat.
>>
>>In this case, I have to ask, will an extra two plies be able to detect that long
>>term threat? If it's a long term threat, I wouldn't think it would matter
>>whether you subtract two (or three) plies from the normal full width search.
>
>I will go into more detail.
>
>Let's say that your current depth is 5.  You are going to make each of your
>moves, and then give black a 4-ply response.
>
>Before you do that, you do the null move thing.  What this amounts to is you
>pass your move and allow your opponent a chance to search.  What depth is this
>search?  It depends upon the depth-reduction factor (R).  R is how this saves
>time -- it takes advantage of the fact that moving twice is usually so potent
>that you don't need a lot of search to kill your opponent if that's possible.
>The typical value for R is 2.  What this means is that the search that black is
>going to get to do will be 2 plies, which is 4 - 2.
>
>So they get a 2-ply search, which is a chance to kill you, and a chance for you
>to respond.  After your response, they don't get a chance to kill you again,
>because this is a 2-ply search not an infinity-ply search.
>
>Some programs cannot detect non-capturing mates at the horizon, so if this
>program is like that, black could have a mate in one, and it would not be
>detected.
>
>So the knife stops inches from white's heart, white thinks he is fine, and this
>whole line is discarded as "awesome for white".
>
>Let's assume that we had not done the null move test.  Now, for each of white's
>moves, black gets a four-ply shot at white.  It is possible that in every case,
>black makes a threat, white cannot parry it, and black mates on the third move.
>There's an extra white move left over, but white is already dead.
>
>So white is dead, and white will figure this out, and fail low on this
>variation.
>
>Do you understand?  If you don't, I will try again, because this is important.
>
>This kind of stuff happens a lot when playing against humans, who sacrifice
>stuff in order to mate you.  I think it's the single worst problem that you'll
>have if you use traditional null move search with R=2.

Yes, exactly, but therefore all such stuff is in vain. I (the super GM) play you
(with disregard to my humiliated self that normally forbade me to play chess
like that), bring you into a closed position, then find out where the key is
hidden for the endgame and then I will bust you with a deep plan, of which you
won't 1) see the end, 2) know how to prevent it technically and 3) have anything
in _your_ realm to find help. So - busted.

Rolf Tueschen


>
>bruce



This page took 0 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.