Author: Tony Werten
Date: 09:43:05 12/28/02
Go up one level in this thread
On December 28, 2002 at 12:31:01, Alessandro Damiani wrote: >On December 28, 2002 at 12:15:46, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: > >>On December 28, 2002 at 11:18:58, Alessandro Damiani wrote: >> >>>On December 28, 2002 at 10:10:53, Ricardo Gibert wrote: >>> >>>>It seems Ed Schröder has added a bit more to his web page: >>>> >>>>http://members.home.nl/matador/chess840.htm#SEARCH >>>> >>>>I have the feeling that ES will be getting a lot of thank yous for quite awhile >>>>for his fine contributions to computer chess. >>>> >>>>Thanks again! >>> >>>It seems to me that there are two typos in the following code: >> >>it's not about the source code. It's about the idea. >>Any sort of pseudo code gets accepted then. Definitely >>by me. > >I am talking about the pseudo code Ed published on his homepage (pseudo code is >still code). I don't understand your statement in this context. > > >> >>Of course do not forget that these reductions are very dangerous >>to use in combination with nullmove and that as Ed describes them >>they completely rape your hashtable. A depth stored as 'n depth left' >>might be in reality n+1. You need to add a bit and some code for >>transpositions to the hashtable in order to fix that. >> > >My new variant of ABC uses depth reductions instead of extensions. So I am >looking at the difference between Ed's reductions and mine. I don't use >conventional null-move yet. > >There is a doctoral thesis by Thomas Barth which describes how depth reductions >work fine with a hashtable. His work is from 1988. I think Ed was one of the last professionals to switch to nullmove. That means there might be some difficulties. You just have to test. Tony > >Alessandro
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.