Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 07:17:42 09/12/99
Go up one level in this thread
On September 12, 1999 at 06:38:23, Alessandro Damiani wrote: >On September 11, 1999 at 22:25:24, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On September 11, 1999 at 17:48:55, Alessandro Damiani wrote: >> >>>On September 11, 1999 at 15:59:19, Ed Schröder wrote: >>> >>>>On September 11, 1999 at 15:36:18, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>>> >>>>>OK... then we are 'in sync' here it seems.. >>>>> >>>>>As far as PVS, the main advantage is that since almost everything is searched >>>>>with a null-window, it saves nodes, _IF_ you do well at move ordering (I have >>>>>no doubt that you do well so PVS might be a win for you too)... >>>>> >>>>>It reduced my trees by 10% and loses nothing at all... unless you screw >>>>>up move ordering, then it can make the tree bigger as you first search with >>>>>a null window, then you have to re-search with the normal window... >>>> >>>>Thus, PVS is aspiration search with a null-window? Is that all there is? >>>> >>>>Ed >>> >>>I think there is problem with the combination null-window and forward pruning: >>>forward pruning is not perfect. So there are more wrong cut-offs with PVS than >>>without. This could affect positional play. >>> >>>Alessandro >> >> >>I don't do forward-pruning at all. Other than the sort of similar idea that >>comes out of null-move search with R=2... > >But null-move is not perfect, too. So there are wrong cut-offs, mainly after >quiet moves. > >Alessandro I would _never_ argue with that. :) It _definitely_ produces problems in the right kinds of positions. It sort of reminds me of banging your head against a brick wall for several minutes. The only reason you would do that is because it feels _so good_ when you stop. Null move is sort of like that... :)
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.