Author: Volker Böhm
Date: 04:56:47 05/10/04
Go up one level in this thread
> > if (type == UPPER && depth-R <= draft && tableval < beta) > avoid_null = 1; > Hi, I don´t understand the "depth-R" part, I would have written "... && depth <= draft && ...". You use the nullmove to predict if a search at current position with depth "depth" will bring a score >= beta. If so, you are finished. If now the hash tells you that a search with "depth" will not bring a score >= beta (upperbound < beta) you shouldn´t do null moves. In the best case the nullmove is just waist of time, in the worst it gets a wrong cutoff. Agree? Even if a search of depth "depht-R" does not give a score >= beta a search with depth "depth" could. Don´t you miss valueable nullmove cuttoffs if you use depth-R hash entries to predict that nullmove will not be effective? Is "depth-R" systematically the best solution or "just" a little optimizaion that could change for other engines? Greetings Volker
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.