Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: When to do a null move search - an experiment

Author: J. Wesley Cleveland

Date: 09:40:21 04/27/04

Go up one level in this thread


On April 26, 2004 at 12:14:33, Josť Carlos wrote:

>On April 26, 2004 at 11:57:43, Vincent Diepeveen wrote:
>
[snip]
>>In *all* experiments i did with nullmove and a program not using *any* forward
>>pruning other than nullmove, the best thing was to *always* nullmove.
>
>
>  Yes, that's what other programmers also said (including me) in the thread we
>had last week. That's pretty intuitive. With not any other forward pruning (or
>very little) but null move, the cost of not trying a null move that would have
>produced a cutoff it terrible compared to the benefit of saving an useless null
>move try. So avoid null move, in this case, must be only in a very few cases
>where you're 99.99% certain you'll fail low... if any.

This seems way too conservative. With R=3 and a branching factor of 4, a null
move should use 1/64 the nodes of a full width search, so if you are 99%
confident you'll fail low, avoid the null move. Fortunately, null move questions
are easy to test. When you would avoid a null move (or skip a full search), set
a flag, make the null move (or full search) anyway, and increment one of two
counters depending on whether the result is the one you expect.



This page took 0.02 seconds to execute

Last modified: Thu, 07 Jul 11 08:48:38 -0700

Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.