Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Verified Null-moving

Author: Stuart Cracraft

Date: 07:20:10 08/12/04

Go up one level in this thread


On August 12, 2004 at 09:25:11, Anthony Cozzie wrote:

>On August 12, 2004 at 07:33:23, Tor Lattimore wrote:
>
>>Testing with WAC it seems to make very little difference between R=3, R=2 or R=3
>>with verrification, even thought the average ply difference is quite different.
>>This leads me to think that R=2 or adaptive based on remaining ply is probobly
>>my best bet, but I think i'll do some longer time control tests to see if that
>>makes a difference.
>>Cheers
>>Tor
>
>Pure R=3 only works for people that do checks in Q-search.
>
>Examples: Zappa, Gothmog (although tord plays games with his R), and I think
>Fruit.
>
>anthony

That is why my GA does and R=3 with verified null move was an improvement
over non-verified null move and very nearly equal to plain R=2, as predicted.
So it is a permanent setting of my program.

Stuart



This page took 0.04 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.