Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 11:22:59 01/18/00
Go up one level in this thread
On January 18, 2000 at 10:08:09, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: >On January 18, 2000 at 09:15:23, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On January 18, 2000 at 06:23:34, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: >> >>>On January 17, 2000 at 16:47:24, Dann Corbit wrote: >>> >>>>I have a theory that NULL move hurts at very, very long calculation times. >>>> >>>>The reason I suspect that it is true is that if one position in ten thousand is >>>>a zugzwang type and you consider a billion positions, a lot of them will be NULL >>>>moves. Most of them will be the kind that really should be avoided (maybe 99% >>>>or even 99.9%) but the 0.1-1% that really should be responded to get ignored. >>>>When only a few million nodes are searched, I doubt if there is a problem except >>>>in rare circumstances. >>>> >>>>Opinions? Am I all wet? >>> >>>You're not correct. double nullmove detects zugzwang. >>>In rook endings typical sometimes a single zugzwang is the problem. >>>Therefore double nullmove is a great invention. Crafty fixes it by >>>turning nullmove off when there is 1 piece left. That is a hard fix. >>>double nullmove sees zugzwang also when there are n pieces left. >>> >>>Vincent. >> >> >>Not me. I don't turn null move off until there are _no_ pieces left... > >Double nullmove nowadays in crafty? >Or don't you find it useful to detect zugzwang with crafty in all those >hundreds of thousands of games at the internet? I just do other tricks. :) But no double-null move, and null-move is still done until the side on move has no pieces at all.
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.