Author: leonid
Date: 04:27:38 03/06/00
Go up one level in this thread
On March 06, 2000 at 00:37:55, Tom Kerrigan wrote: >On March 05, 2000 at 21:14:19, leonid wrote: > >>It is interesting that you find response for 9 moves in just few seconds. >>Usually when you have inside of each ply somewhere around 20 nodes, and there >>promotion of the pawn probably permit this, time for 13 moves should take >>probably more that few months to be solved. Only "quick logic", and this >>position never sound to be solvable by it, can take up to the 13 moves in just a >>split of the second. I speak about 13 moves since it is limit in my mate solving >>logic. > >When you were comparing your program to other programs, did you explicitly use >the mate solving feature of the other programs? Yes. For sure. And I used only the programs that were capable to solve the mate positions as well. Not all game do this. Many, between the famous one, simply have no place for this kind of solutions. My guess now is that they have many short cuts that speed positional thinking but make big mistakes in positionn where 100% logical solution is demanded. >If not, you are comparing your mate solver to some other guy's chess program. >There's a HUGE difference. What you want to say here I just don't know. And to be franc with you, when I started my chess game writing I expected that everybody have in its game special unit for solving the mate. Only later (finally Bob Hyatt said me this) other games done differently. If you will be interested one day to see what logic is speedier (I am too lazy for now to try positions by handreds) I can send you my game. Anyway it is all the time on the Web as free game (LLCHESS). Mate Solver is 100% finished while positional logic lack not logic unit. Still in the game must be put in database and all those things that I expect to put there when my positional logic will be as good as mate solving. Game is even now playable. I hope that you will change your idea by the time and will go into complet chess game creation. Many things from the creation of mate solver could be very useful there. I found, for instance, that nobody put its checking moves at the head of the chain of moves. And this idea came simply from the mate solver. I am sure that you came to the same alignement of the moves. Leonid. >-Tom
This page took 0.02 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.