Author: Dave Gomboc
Date: 22:35:20 01/27/00
Go up one level in this thread
On January 27, 2000 at 21:20:46, Christophe Theron wrote: >On January 27, 2000 at 14:21:19, Dave Gomboc wrote: > >>On January 27, 2000 at 13:00:39, Christophe Theron wrote: >> >>>On January 27, 2000 at 00:06:19, Dave Gomboc wrote: >>> >>>>On January 25, 2000 at 21:26:19, Christophe Theron wrote: >>>> >>>>>On January 25, 2000 at 13:33:36, Dave Gomboc wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>It seems weird to me that when Ed Schroder says Rebel does better without >>>>>>null-move than with it, people believe it, but people criticize the DB team for >>>>>>not using it (e.g. from your text above: "by not using a good, known pruning >>>>>>system..."). >>>>> >>>>>If the DB team did not have enough time, they could simply take the null move >>>>>algorithm because there is documentation available on it. >>>>> >>>>>However null move is not the final say. Rebel does very well with ANOTHER >>>>>pruning system. Junior does very well with ANOTHER pruning system as well. And >>>>>there are other programs that do fine without null move, one of which I know >>>>>very well. >>>> >>>>Yes, and DB does very well with ANOTHER pruning system too. What's your point? >>>> >>>>Dave >>> >>> >>>My point is that they claimed that they did not use one. Several of us, looking >>>at the apparent branching factor shown in the DB log files, have doubts about >>>this. >>> >>> >>> Christophe >> >>Where did they claim that they did not use one? In their published work they >>clearly stated the contrary. >> >>Dave > > >What did they say? > > > Christophe Argh, I can't find the paper! In the software, there are some full-width plies, then some selective plies. In the hardware, there are some full-width plies again. That is from memory though. Maybe Ernst can pull out his copy of Search Control in Deep Blue? Dave
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.