Author: Dave Gomboc
Date: 16:57:28 05/11/99
Go up one level in this thread
On May 11, 1999 at 18:37:50, Dann Corbit wrote: >On May 11, 1999 at 17:26:18, Dave Gomboc wrote: >[snip] >>Chess knowledge is already being incorporated into the programs. It is just as >>important to not waste time incorporating chess knowledge that the search would >>have figured out on its own with less cost. >> >>Every talks about a branching factor of 30, or 35, or 28 (your number). But >>really, it's about 2-4 in today's programs. Still exponential, but it's clear >>that this makes "eventually" even more eventual. :-) >It can only examine 2-4 choices if it does things like null-move pruning and >other tricks of that nature. This means that it only works "most of the time" >and fails sometimes. I think that engineered zugzwang positions may be a very >good way to defeat most chess programs. Zugzwang positions are very rare in Chess. It's more common that there is just no good way to improve a position, but null-move will still work in these positions. Dave
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.