Author: John Merlino
Date: 10:25:59 09/15/02
Go up one level in this thread
On September 15, 2002 at 01:21:58, Chessfun wrote: >On September 15, 2002 at 00:19:20, John Merlino wrote: > >>On September 14, 2002 at 17:14:41, Kurt Utzinger wrote: >> >>>Zugeordnete Felder 1.g4 - Cheron 0724 >>>[D]8/8/K6p/6p1/8/8/k5PP/8 w - - 0 1 >>> >>>In this position the old TheKing 3.12d under Fritz7-GUI finds the winning move >>>1.g4 within 7s. CM9 with the same amount of hashtables (32 MB) needs 3m7s, but >>>CM9 with only 4 MB hashtables is the fastest with 3s. A real mystery for me, all >>>on P4 1800/512. >>> >>>Analysis by The King 3.12d: Fritz7-GUI (32 MB hash) >>> >>>1.Kb5 Kb2 2.Kc5 Kc2 3.Kd5 Kd2 4.Ke5 Ke2 5.Kf6 g4 6.Kf5 g3 7.hxg3 Kf2 8.g4 Kg3 >>>9.Ke4 Kxg2 10.Kf5 Kf3 >>> = (0.13) Depth: 3 00:00:00 >>> = (0.09) Depth: 20 00:00:04 1512kN >>>1.g4 Kb2 2.Kb6 Kb3 3.Kb5 Kc3 4.Kc5 Kd3 5.Kd5 Ke3 6.Ke5 Kf2 7.Kf6 Kf3 8.Kf5 Ke3 >>>9.h3 Kd4 10.Kg6 Ke5 11.Kxh6 Kf6 12.Kh5 Kg7 13.Kxg5 >>> +- (1.47) Depth: 20 00:00:07 2232kN >>> +- (4.49) Depth: 24 00:02:49 41876kN >>> >>>(Utzinger, MyTown 14.09.2002) >>>******************************************************************************** >>>TheKing 3.23 (CM9 GUI) 32 MB hash >>> >>>Time Depth Score Positions Moves >>>0:04 17/21 0.08 1772968 1.Kb5 Kb2 2.Kc5 Kc2 3.Kd5 Kd2 4.Ke5 >>> Ke2 5.Kf6 g4 6.Kf5 g3 7.hxg3 Kf2 >>> 8.Kf4 Kxg2 9.g4 Kf2 10.Ke4 Kg2 >>> 11.Kf5 Kf3 >>>0:09 18/22 0.08 2783014 1.Kb5 Kb2 2.Kc5 Kc2 3.Kd5 Kd2 4.Ke5 >>> Ke2 5.Kf6 g4 6.Kf5 g3 7.hxg3 Kf2 >>> 8.Kf4 Kxg2 9.g4 Kf2 10.Ke4 Kg2 >>> 11.Kf5 Kf3 >>>3:07 18/22 2.19 39768632 1.g4 Kb3 2.Kb5 Kc3 3.Kc5 Kd3 4.Kd5 >>> Ke3 5.Ke5 Kf2 6.Kf6 Kf3 7.Kf5 Kg2 >>> 8.Kg6 Kf3 9.h3 Kg3 10.Kxh6 Kh4 >>> 11.Kg6 Kxh3 12.Kxg5 >>>---- ---- ---- ---- ---- >>>******************************************************************************** >>>TheKing 3.23 (CM9 GUI) 4 MB hash >>> >>>Time Depth Score Positions Moves >>>0:00 12/16 0.10 249552 1.Kb5 Kb3 2.g4 Kc3 3.Kc5 Kd3 4.Kd5 >>> Ke3 5.Ke5 Kf3 6.Kf5 Kg2 7.Kg6 Kh3 >>> 8.Kh5 Kxh2 9.Kxh6 >>>0:00 13/17 0.10 350152 1.Kb5 Kb3 2.g4 Kc3 3.Kc5 Kd3 4.Kd5 >>> Ke3 5.Ke5 Kf3 6.Kf5 Kg2 7.Kg6 Kh3 >>> 8.Kh5 Kxh2 9.Kxh6 >>>0:01 14/18 0.31 587468 1.Kb5 Kb2 2.Kc5 Kc2 3.Kd5 Kd2 4.Ke5 >>> Ke2 5.Kf6 g4 6.Kf5 g3 7.hxg3 Kf2 >>> 8.g4 Kxg2 9.Kf4 Kh3 >>>0:03 14/18 1.51 960806 1.g4 Kb3 2.Kb5 Kc3 3.Kc5 Kd3 4.Kd5 >>> Ke3 5.Ke5 Kf3 6.Kf5 Kg2 7.Kg6 Kf3 >>> 8.h3 Ke4 9.Kxh6 Kf4 10.Kg6 >>>0:04 15/19 1.49 1158272 1.g4 Kb3 2.Kb5 Kc3 3.Kc5 Kd3 4.Kd5 >>> Ke3 5.Ke5 Kf2 6.Kf6 Ke3 7.Kg6 Kf4 >>> 8.h3 Ke5 9.Kxh6 Kf6 10.Kh5 >>>0:47 16/20 2.19 9617559 1.g4 Kb3 2.Kb5 Kc3 3.Kc5 Kd3 4.Kd5 >>> Ke3 5.Ke5 Kf2 6.Kf6 Ke3 7.Kg6 Kf4 >>> 8.h3 Kg3 9.Kxh6 Kh4 10.Kg6 Kxh3 >>> 11.Kxg5 >>>0:51 17/21 2.19 10532568 1.g4 Kb3 2.Kb5 Kc3 3.Kc5 Kd3 4.Kd5 >>> Ke3 5.Ke5 Kf2 6.Kf6 Ke3 7.Kg6 Kf4 >>> 8.h3 Kg3 9.Kxh6 Kh4 10.Kg6 Kxh3 >>> 11.Kxg5 >>>1:15 18/22 3.48 15574649 1.g4 Kb3 2.Kb5 Kc3 3.Kc5 Kd3 4.Kd5 >>> Ke3 5.Ke5 Kf2 6.Kf6 Ke3 7.Kg6 Kf4 >>> 8.h3 Ke5 9.Kg7 Ke6 10.Kxh6 Kf6 >>> 11.Kh5 Kg7 12.Kxg5 >>>1:17 19/23 3.48 16035289 1.g4 Kb3 2.Kb5 Kc3 3.Kc5 Kd3 4.Kd5 >>> Ke3 5.Ke5 Kf2 6.Kf6 Ke3 7.Kg6 Kf4 >>> 8.h3 Ke5 9.Kg7 Ke6 10.Kxh6 Kf6 >>> 11.Kh5 Kg7 12.Kxg5 >>>1:20 20/24 3.81 16776827 1.g4 Kb3 2.Kb5 Kc3 3.Kc5 Kd3 4.Kd5 >>> Ke3 5.Ke5 Kf2 6.Kf6 Ke3 7.Kg6 Kf4 >>> 8.h3 Ke5 9.Kxh6 Kf6 10.Kh5 Kg7 >>> 11.Kxg5 Kf7 12.h4 Kg7 13.Kf5 >>>******************************************************************************** >> >>Johan was gracious enough to answer my e-mail on a Saturday (although it was >>probably very early on a Sunday for him!). Here is what he said: >> >>-------------- >>Basically, the shape of the search tree (hence the size) depends very much on >>"luck". Different programs, different versions, and different settings (even the >>hash table size or k-best mode) may change the "solution time" by a factor 10 or >>100 easily. >> >>Chess programmers are of course not very happy with this behaviour, but the >>average performance (ie scoring points) always goes first. In other words, >>theoretical correctness is always sacrificed in favor of average program speed >>and development time, with every programmer using his favourite trick(s) to keep >>the damage small. Another example of the luck factor can be observed in the >>thread CCC:251808. > >Does the last statement mean that Johan reads CCC? Anyway I don't see the two >positions as related but who knows. Or did you yourself also send him that >position as an example as you never posted in the thread? > >Sarah. Yes, Johan reads CCC. Sometimes I will point out a specific thread to him (as in this case), but he does keep relatively up-to-date on this board. Johan specifically pointed out the other thread in his reply to me. jm
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.