Computer Chess Club Archives




Subject: Re: Verified Null-moving

Author: Ross Boyd

Date: 06:03:26 08/14/04

Go up one level in this thread

On August 13, 2004 at 08:30:16, Pham Hong Nguyen wrote:

>On August 12, 2004 at 18:18:40, Ross Boyd wrote:
>>On August 12, 2004 at 06:58:36, Pham Hong Nguyen wrote:
>>>>Be careful with R=3. It has the potential to make your engine go blind. I lost
>>>I gess you did not read about Verified Null-moving yet ;)
>>I implemented it more than a year ago. It worked in some positions... not in
>>others... so I removed it. So much has changed in my engine since then it could
>>work if I tried it again.
>>What I meant to say was "Be careful with pure R=3."
>Sorry, but I think Verified Null-moving is designed for working with R=3 only
>because of attraction of getting fewer nodes. The aim of verification to reduece
>the risk of R=3. Any other value of R will make this algorithm become useless.

Yes, I read the paper by Omid... and used R=3 but it just didn't pay off for me
at the time. Probably it interacted with something else I wasn't doing
properly.... I will have another crack at Verified NM Pruning some time in the
near future.


This page took 0.01 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.