Author: Christophe Theron
Date: 11:38:12 11/18/99
Go up one level in this thread
On November 18, 1999 at 07:26:18, Bas Hamstra wrote:
>Interesting discussion. I have a microscopic comment for Christophe:
>
>>Take null move for example. Suppose you are at two plies from the horizon and
>>it's your turn to move. Here you notice that you fail high (your score is above
>>beta = really good), so you execute a null move (make nothing but change the
>>side to move), reduce the depth, and as it is already low enough you just do a
>>capture search for your opponent. If you still fail low (= your opponent cannot
>>execute a capture that gains material) you stop searching here.
>
>What you are saying is nullmove near the leafs makes errors. I agree. But if you
>would skip nullmove there, and make sure a nullmove is followed by at least one
>real move, it costs you a ply (something like that according to my testing). So
>you *still* wouldn't see that crucial non capturing rookmove.
>
>And it will see it the next iteration, in both cases. So what you are saying
>sounds good, but still is not immediately convincing...
>
>
>Regards,
>Bas Hamstra.
I'm just pointing out a potential problem that can make a big difference. I'm
not really trying to convince. I just point out something, that's food for the
mind...
Christophe
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.