Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 18:05:33 01/19/00
Go up one level in this thread
On January 19, 2000 at 20:37:58, Dann Corbit wrote: >Under exactly what conditions does NULL move degenerate? >Under exactly what conditions does NULL move remain valid? > >I see a lot of banter about the conditions of the test (when none were stated >except depth). What conditions matter and why? That is the point. One poster assumes that null move failures become more likely as material comes off the board. I said "not true" for a program that handles this correctly. I also said that for normal positions, the difference between depth N and 2N does not see the probability of a null-move failure go up. It seems that it should remain constant, particularly when at least my program is smart enough to recognize that null-move is not appropriate in some positions with reduced material and therefore avoids trying them. I postulated that in the opening, it would never get 'worse'. In the middlegame it would never get worse, until very late middlegame positions where it is likely that the search would penetrate to depths that see no pieces at all, or only one piece, which are the types of positions that null-move failures tend to occur at. But in _my_ case, it is moot. As material gets too 'thin' I take evasive action to avoid null-move failures. As a result, I don't see the point of the argument...
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.