Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: an evaluation problem of chess programs

Author: Robert Hyatt

Date: 09:41:15 10/03/98

Go up one level in this thread


On October 03, 1998 at 00:49:36, blass uri wrote:

>
>On October 03, 1998 at 00:22:11, Robert Hyatt wrote:
>
>>On October 02, 1998 at 21:24:51, blass uri wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>On October 02, 1998 at 20:47:47, Robert Hyatt wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>because crafty doesn't evaluate KPP vs K or KP vs KP as won, in that
>>>>position.
>>>
>>>KP vs KP is not relevant
>>>and I assume that KPP vs K  is evaluated as at least 1 pawn advantage in every
>>>position even if the black king can get into the square of the white pawn.
>>>
>>>I understand now that you use crafty15.21 and not crafty15.20 so if my
>>>assumption is right then crafty15.20 will play Rxb2 with tablebases at depth=12
>>>and you did an important improvement with the new extension stuff.
>>>
>>>Uri
>>
>>
>>
>>first, you are making a gross assumption when you say "KP vs KP is not
>>relevant".  Remember that this is a deep search, full-width.  So this particular
>>database gets hit about 10,000 times during my 12 ply search.
>
>I simply can see that white can force KPP vs K and there is no reason to go for
>KP vs KP(you can go to it by pusing your pawn forward instead of going with the
>king to catch the pawns but it is not the shortest way to win)
>
>Uri


unfortunately, this has nothing to do with the way computers do their
full-width search.  They consider *every* plan that can be realized within
some fixed search horizon.  In this position, all of the three KPPKP, KPPK
and KPKP (and KPK) are possible...



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.