Author: Omid David Tabibi
Date: 11:35:25 08/21/03
Go up one level in this thread
On August 21, 2003 at 14:13:00, Sune Fischer wrote: >On August 21, 2003 at 10:41:26, Omid David Tabibi wrote: > >>On August 21, 2003 at 10:29:15, Omid David Tabibi wrote: >> >>>On August 21, 2003 at 10:10:54, Mihaly Szalai wrote: >>> >>>>[D]8/8/8/4p1p1/6N1/5p1p/5K2/7k w - - 0 1 >>>> >>>>All the programs I've tried see the mate >>>>except Junior 7 and 8. They go to depth=63 >>>>and score=0.00 in a few seconds then stop. >>>>Why? One knight is not enough to mate? >>> >>>Interesting case. I guess when one side is left with a knight or a bishop, >>>Junior sets beta = 0, i.e., that he cannot achieve more than a draw. It is a >>>kind of tradeoff: in many positions this knowledge saves a lot of search (by >>>pruning the tree), but in very rare examples like the above, it produces >>>erroneous results. >>> >>>I believe that the risk is negligible in comparison to the considerable gain. >>>However, as a matter of principle I'm against such "assumptions"... >> >>To quote Eric Bogosian in the movie 'Under Siege 2: Dark Territory': >> >>"Assumption is the mother of all f**k-ups" :) > >Then you can disable nullmove as well, that f**k ups as well some times. I use verified null-move pruning, it doesn't f**k-up :) > >-S.
This page took 0.01 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.