Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 21:44:37 02/03/01
Go up one level in this thread
On February 02, 2001 at 21:10:54, Paul wrote: >On February 02, 2001 at 20:45:01, Dieter Buerssner wrote: > >>On February 02, 2001 at 13:46:34, Paul wrote: >> >>>different programs find different mates with egtb's or without, that's because >>>the trees they're searching have a different shape. Some extend some lines >>>deeper, others other lines. The only time they should definitely agree about the >>>mate is when they see an egtb mate at the root position! >> >>I totally agree here. >> >>>Otherwise it's mostly an upper limit. >> >>I don't know, what you exactly mean by mostly, but I believe, this is not >>totally correct. I think, especially with EGTB mates, it is quite possible >>that it is not an upper limit, and that with higher depth the opponent may >>by able to find a refutation, that delays the mate. But after thinking about >>this for some time, my head is spinning ... >>So, obviously, I can be wrong. >> > >Hi Dieter ... > >Is there a difference according to you between 'normal' mates found by a search >without using EGTB's, and mates found by a search that is using EGTB's? If so, >what? And if not, then normal non-EGTB-search-mates are not an upper bound? > >Groetjes, >Paul If a program says mate in N, then you can be sure there is a mate in N or fewer moves. The only exception is that the 50 move rule might kick in before mate can be delivered. Or if the program has a bug of course.
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.