Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 07:35:15 08/17/99
Go up one level in this thread
On August 17, 1999 at 03:46:23, blass uri wrote: > >On August 17, 1999 at 02:14:10, Ed Schröder wrote: > >>On August 16, 1999 at 23:55:49, Robert Hyatt wrote: >> >>>On August 16, 1999 at 14:25:47, blass uri wrote: >>> >>>> >>>>On August 16, 1999 at 12:59:10, Ed Schröder wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>>>But in the end the human knows how to play chess. A computer will never >>>>>find moves like Ra1 (Fischer) or Rxd4 (Kasparov) and and and... Ok, maybe >>>>>in 100 years :-) Just try this (old and simple) one. >>>>> >>>>>5rk1/5p2/pr2pPp1/Pp1pP1Pp/1PpP3P/K1P5/8/8 w - - am a5b6; >>>> >>>>Doctor3 after 16 minutes and 42 seconds on p200MMX: >>>> >>>>Kb2 44/45 with evaluation -10.51 >>>> >>>>Uri >>> >>> >>>takes crafty on my PII/300 notebook 1:32 to find Kb2. Takes my quad xeon >>>about 12 seconds. Here is PII/300 output: >>> >>> 18-> 12.18 -8.14 1. axb6 Rb8 2. Kb2 Rxb6 3. Kc2 a5 4. >>> bxa5 Ra6 5. Kb2 Rxa5 6. Kb1 Ra3 7. >>> Kb2 b4 8. cxb4 Rd3 9. b5 Rxd4 >>> 19 18.89 -8.20 1. axb6 Rb8 2. Kb2 Rxb6 3. Kc2 a5 4. >>> bxa5 Ra6 5. Kb2 Rxa5 6. Kb1 Kf8 7. >>> Kb2 Ra4 8. Kb1 b4 9. cxb4 Rxb4+ 10. >>> Kc2 Ke8 >>> 19-> 19.09 -8.20 1. axb6 Rb8 2. Kb2 Rxb6 3. Kc2 a5 4. >>> bxa5 Ra6 5. Kb2 Rxa5 6. Kb1 Kf8 7. >>> Kb2 Ra4 8. Kb1 b4 9. cxb4 Rxb4+ 10. >>> Kc2 Ke8 >>> 20 20.22 -- 1. axb6 >>> 20 31.67 -9.25 1. axb6 Rb8 2. Kb2 Rxb6 3. Kc2 a5 4. >>> bxa5 Ra6 5. Kb2 Rxa5 6. Kb1 Ra3 7. >>> Kb2 b4 8. cxb4 Rh3 9. Kc2 Rxh4 10. >>> Kd2 Rxd4+ 11. Ke3 >>> 20 1:32 -8.62 1. Kb2 Rfb8 2. Kc2 Kf8 3. Kd2 Ke8 4. >>> Ke3 R6b7 5. Kd2 Ra8 6. Ke3 Kd7 7. Kf4 >>> Rc8 8. Ke3 Kc6 9. Kf4 Rd7 10. Ke3 Rcc7 >>> 20-> 1:32 -8.62 1. Kb2 Rfb8 2. Kc2 Kf8 3. Kd2 Ke8 4. >>> Ke3 R6b7 5. Kd2 Ra8 6. Ke3 Kd7 7. Kf4 >>> Rc8 8. Ke3 Kc6 9. Kf4 Rd7 10. Ke3 Rcc7 >>> 21 2:32 -8.62 1. Kb2 Rfb8 2. Kc2 Kf8 3. Kd2 Ke8 4. >>> Ke3 R6b7 5. Kd2 Ra8 6. Ke3 Kd7 7. Kf4 >>> Rbb8 8. Kg3 Re8 9. Kf4 Rad8 10. Ke3 >>> Rc8 11. Kf4 >>> 21-> 2:32 -8.62 1. Kb2 Rfb8 2. Kc2 Kf8 3. Kd2 Ke8 4. >>> Ke3 R6b7 5. Kd2 Ra8 6. Ke3 Kd7 7. Kf4 >>> Rbb8 8. Kg3 Re8 9. Kf4 Rad8 10. Ke3 >>> Rc8 11. Kf4 >> >>That's all nice of course but the score isn't 0.00 as it should be which >>was my point of computers and understanding chess. Every 1500 player >>sees it is a draw as long as you don't capture except computers. >> >>A 100 years before computers will recognize this kind of positions as >>a draw? >> >>Ed Schroder > >I am more optimistic >I do not think we need to wait 100 years for it. > >It is not a problem to do a program that evaluate it as a draw today. > >One way is to tell the computer that if all the 8 pawns are blocked in different >files and one side has only pieces behind the pawns that are only rooks or a >bishop that cannot take the pawn then the position is a draw. > >Programmers prefer not to do it because it cannot help much in games. > >Uri This is a well-known problem. Cray Blitz solved this position in 1984 when no one thought a computer could. It was very fast, of course. This was a demo position at ACC4, in a paper called "Artificial Stupidity". I bet the presenter that CB would not take and he said "baloney". He got to put that on two pieces of bread and had a sandwich for dinner. :) It is a non-trivial, but fixable problem. But the fix will hurt because it won't be 'free'...
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.