Author: Dieter Buerssner
Date: 13:09:42 08/21/03
Go up one level in this thread
On August 21, 2003 at 16:02:35, Omid David Tabibi wrote: >I did say that Junior probably gains considerably by this assumption. My >objection is a matter of principle: given enough time a program should play >correctly in any (practical) position. Exactly the same here. Omid, when I read your paper about null move pruning, I thought, it could fail for this objection. Did I read it wrong. A position discussed in the German CSS-Forum: [D] 8/1B6/8/5p2/8/8/5Qrq/1K1R2bk w - - A mate in 3. My engine, using a different sort of null move pruning (that theoretically really will play correctly in any position given enough time), needed over 10 minutes ... An engine can be lucky (or clever) with the evals, and null move pruning may not avoid finding the mate fast in the above position. In general, however the above position will be unsolvable for normal null move algorithms. Regards, Dieter
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.