Author: Ed Schröder
Date: 01:10:29 01/30/04
Go up one level in this thread
On January 30, 2004 at 03:40:57, Tord Romstad wrote: >Recursive null move pruning is an effective way to speed up the search of >a chess engine, but I really detest its unfortunate side effects. Most of all >i hate its tendency to cause search inconsistencies, and that it tends to prune >away strong lines where a piece must traverse a long and complicated path in >order to reach a good square. I try to cure the second problem by using a >dynamic reduction factor, and I also plan to experiment with Markoff's idea >of trajectories to see if that can help to reduce the problem further. I have >no idea what to do with the search inconsistencies. > >Most of all, I would like to throw away null move pruning (at least in its >traditional form) completely. Unfortunately my attempts to get rid of it have >so far been very unsuccessful. It simply slows down my engine too much, and >the other pruning I do is not enough to compensate. I really need some >effective replacement for recursive null move pruning. > >Are there any known algorithms which are close to null move pruning in terms >of efficiency? It is clear that such techniques exist, for instance whatever >Junior and Tiger do appears to be at least as effective. But I cannot recall >having seen any really interesting ideas discussed in public. > >Tord Tord, I am sure you have read Rebel's approach -> static selective search as a base and controlled by nullmove during the first x plies catching the errors of the static evaluation. My best, Ed
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.