Author: KarinsDad
Date: 10:06:35 02/10/99
Go up one level in this thread
On February 10, 1999 at 03:50:00, Peter McKenzie wrote: [snip] > >Ok, so far we have : >Ply 1. Q moves somewhere stupid, >Ply 2. pxQ > >You then talk about doing a null move, but it is not clear to me when you want >the null move to be done. In this line, I think the important null move will >come at ply 4. So we might have: > >Ply 1 (white) Q moves somewhere stupid, >Ply 2 (black) pxQ >Ply 3 (white) try all moves here >Ply 4 (black) try Null Move first (then try other moves) >Ply 5 (white) try all moves >Stop HERE if doing a 7 ply search (using R=2). > >So with any luck, the Null Move at ply 4 will hardly ever be refuted which means >that in that branch you save yourself a whole **2 plies** of searching. This is why I was typing in Ply 1, 2, etc. When someone charts it like this, it is really easy to understand. Thanks a lot Peter. This helps immensely. > >I personally think that Null Move Pruning is the most significant computer chess >algorithm to have been discovered in the last 10-20 years. > >>moves at ply 3 and all legals moves as if it was still white's move at ply 4) >>for a total of 36 + 1296 or 1332 generated legal moves (37 calls of the legal >>move generator) and 1332 evaluations (but possibly not a full evaluation). >> >>If any of the "ply 3" or "ply 4" null moves lead to check, do you have to search >>on? And what do you do with the "ply 3" check where you are doing null move, so > >You don't try the null move if you are in check, does this answer your question? Yes. > [snip] KarinsDad
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.