Author: Vincent Diepeveen
Date: 22:59:17 07/20/99
Go up one level in this thread
On July 21, 1999 at 01:22:41, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On July 20, 1999 at 18:10:59, José de Jesús García Ruvalcaba wrote: > >> Could somebody please explain in simple (but accurate) words the essentials of >>conspiracy numbers search? >> I know I can read the research papers from the Zugzwang team, but first I need >>something less dense. >>José. > > >The basic idea is to detect deep forcing lines. The idea is this. If you >reach a position P in the tree, and from that position you search a set of >moves leading to new positions... how many of those successor moves actually >affect the current score? > >IE if the score is a result of only one move, then we consider this a forcing >position where there is no real chance to vary... The term 'conspiracy' comes >from the idea of "how many positions below this position have to 'conspire' >together to change the score at this position?" If changing the score of one >move changes this position, it is forcing. If changing the score of many moves >doesn't affect this one, it is a 'quiet' position... > >There are other details, but that is the gist of why it might be useful... >Because at every node where the conspiracy number is low (only a few scores >have to change to change this position) we can search deeper since this is a >forcing position. In positions where it takes a lot of changes below this >node to change the score at this node, we don't extend because it is not a >forcing position. > >When you think about it, it is a form of singular extension, a form of check >extension, a form of one-reply extension, etc... Not at all. It sees more than that. It sees variations very *little* possibilities, which SE never would detect.
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.