Author: Sune Fischer
Date: 13:42:04 08/21/03
Go up one level in this thread
On August 21, 2003 at 16:02:35, Omid David Tabibi wrote: >On August 21, 2003 at 14:48:55, Sune Fischer wrote: > >>On August 21, 2003 at 14:35:25, Omid David Tabibi wrote: >> >>>>>"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 :) >> >>Then it comes at a cost. > >Yes, the "cost" is a smaller tree in comparison to standard null-move. May God >bless these "costs"! I can produce a 1 node tree, but does it play better? :) >>You can't make a strong program without doing certain assumptions. > >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. I think the competition is rather fierce at the top, so their decision is understandable if the choice is between gaining X Elo in real games, or solving artificial test positions. Real games weigh more than silly test positions, IMO, although ideally we'd all like to do everything :) -S.
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.