Author: Omid David Tabibi
Date: 15:35:55 07/01/03
Go up one level in this thread
On July 01, 2003 at 18:28:25, Russell Reagan wrote: >On July 01, 2003 at 18:24:43, Omid David Tabibi wrote: > >>... which is called verified null-mvoe pruning :) > >So if fail high reductions is kind of like null-move without the "radicalness", >and verified null-move pruning takes the "radicallness" out of null-move, do >fail high reductions and verified null-move give similar results? :) Although I haven't compared the two algorithms, it should be obvious that verified null-move pruning is more accurate than fail-high reductions, since the depth reduction is based on a shallow null-move search (dynamic) rather than static evaluation. Verified null-move pruning and fail-high reductions might share some common ideas (pointed out by Bob Hyatt), but besides that they have little in common from a practical point of view. Anyway, as ususal the suggestion is: try both of them and use the one that works better for you.
This page took 0 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.