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 0.01 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.