Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 08:25:59 11/11/03
Go up one level in this thread
On November 11, 2003 at 11:09:40, José Carlos wrote: >On November 11, 2003 at 10:52:20, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On November 11, 2003 at 10:42:10, José Carlos wrote: >> >>> So far, when I cutoff due to null move, I do BetaCutoffs++ but not >>>BetaCutoffsAtFirst++ so my 100 * BCAF / BC statistic gets lowered. Is there an >>>standard for this for I can compare with other people numbers? Should I count a >>>null move cutoff as a beta cutoff at first? Should I not do BetaCutoffs++? >>> >>> José C. >> >>Don't do anything in that case. You only care about the ratio of >>[cutoffs on first move] : [cutoffs on any but first move]. >> >>The higher that ratio the better. > > So you mean not to count null move cutoffs as cutoffs at all, right? > > José C. Right. or you might count null-move searches done, and null-move searches that failed high, if you want to know how effective null-move search is. But it is clearly independent of the idea of base move ordering where the first move should cause a cutoff if one is going to happen.
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.