Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Never Say "Impossible"

Author: Graham Laight

Date: 02:22:39 05/17/01

Go up one level in this thread


On May 16, 2001 at 14:35:18, Uri Blass wrote:

>On May 16, 2001 at 14:07:18, Robert Hyatt wrote:
>
>>On May 16, 2001 at 13:05:13, J. Wesley Cleveland wrote:
>>
>>>On May 15, 2001 at 22:11:15, Robert Hyatt wrote:
>>>
>>>>On May 15, 2001 at 12:18:43, J. Wesley Cleveland wrote:
>>>>
>>>[snip]
>>>
>>>>>>First, how do you conclude 10^25?  assuming alpha/beta and sqrt(N)?
>>>>>
>>>>>It is a classic alpha-beta search with a transposition table large enough to
>>>>>hold *all* positions found in the search. I'm guessing at the number of
>>>>>positions, but I feel that the same logic should hold, as only positions with
>>>>>one side playing perfectly would be seen.
>>>>
>>>>I don't follow.  We know that within the 50 move rule, the longest game that
>>>>can be played is something over 10,000 plies.  IE 50 moves, then a pawn push
>>>>or capture, then 50 more, etc.  Eventually you run out of pieces and it is a
>>>>draw.  But 38^10000 and 10^25 seem to have little in common.  The alpha/beta
>>>>algorithm is going to search about 38^50000 nodes to search that tree to max
>>>>depth of 10,000.
>>>
>>>Look at it another way. The only positions that are visited by an alpha/beta
>>>search (with perfect move ordering) are those where one side plays perfectly.
>>>The question is what fraction of the total number of positions that is.
>>>
>>
>>The precise formula is:
>>
>>    N = W^floor(D/2) + W^ceil(D/2) for all D.  floor means round down in integer
>>math, ceil means round up.  For the cases where D is even:
>>
>>    N = 2 * W^(D/2)  which is 2 * sqrt(minimax).
>>
>>If you assume that the total number of positions is roughly 2^168, then you
>>get 2 * sqrt(2^168) or 2 * 2^84.  Which is fairly close to the number of atoms
>>in the universe.  Note that 168 is not cast in stone either.  It might be a
>>few bits more or less, but it is probably close.
>
>It is proved to be clearly less than 2^168.
>I believe my counting program proved that it is less than 2^160 but I have not
>the numbers near me.
>I guess it is between 2^140 and 2^150.
>
>I had an idea how to get a good estimate for it by a program but nobody tried to
>calculate an estimate for it.
>
>My idea is simply to generate a lot of random pseudo legal positions(1000000 is
>enough) and try to find the number of legal positions.
>
>In order to generate pseudo legal position you need to the following steps:
>
>1)Calculate the number of pseudo legal positions for every possible legal
>material structure
>2)generate a random pseudo legal position.
>3)check if the pseudo legal position can be achieved by a chess game.
>
>If you find that the number of pseudo legal positions is 10^47 and you also find
>that 173 out of 1000000 pseudo legal positions are legal then
>10^47*173\1000000 is a very good estimate for the number of the legal positions.
>(If you have enough pseudo legal positions that are legal you can be sure with
>95% confidence that the mistake in the estimate is less than 10%)
>
>It seems that nobody is really interested in the number of legal positions so we
>are not going to know a good estimate.
>
>Uri

If nobody is willing to to the large sample size, why not do it yourself with a
small sample size?

If I were sufficiently interested, I would:

* number each piece (e.g. 1 = white pawn, 2 = black pawn etc)

* number the squares on the board from 1 - 64

* select, at random, the number of pieces to put on the board

* for each piece, select a random number from 1 - 64 to select it's board square

* if I intended to do a very small sample (e.g. 20 tries), to get a ball-park
figure, I would set up a simple spreadsheet to to the above, and use my recalc
key to get a new list of pieces/positions

* if I intended to do more than 100 samples, I would either write a more
sophisticated spreadsheet that would show something like a board (as well as
rudimentary checks like having 1 white and 1 black king), or write a program to
draw random boards

This procedure won't get you your answer correct to 4 significant figures - but
it should give you an idea.

-g



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.