Author: Steve Coladonato
Date: 11:17:33 01/18/00
Go up one level in this thread
On January 18, 2000 at 13:52:22, Dave Gomboc wrote: >On January 18, 2000 at 10:40:30, Steve Coladonato wrote: > >>Are tablebases basically a set of finite positions that have pointers to >>subsequent positions (most probably positions leading to a win)? And if so, is >>the basic algorithm to go to the next position that in turn will have a pointer >>to a "won" position? I am also concluding that once a program starts to use a >>tablebase, it no longer does any "real" processing, just pointer evaluation. Is >>this basically it or am I way off the mark here? >> >>Thanks. >> >>Steve > >You're on the right track. The tablebases are the set of positions, accompanied >by the number of ply it will take to win (or lose)... or if the position is a >draw (or simply impossible to reach by the rules of the game, e.g. both kings in >check), it notes that too. Once the root position (the position on the board) >is in tablebase land, the only processing you do is to see, hmm well I had a >mate in 51, so let's try all of the moves that are legal here and see which one >is a mate in 50... aha, it's Rg6, let's play that. Of course, if two or more >moves led to mate in 50, you could choose any of them. > >"Pointer" has a specific computer programming meaning, and it wouldn't be >correct to say that the positions have pointers to the successor positions, but >if you are thinking in general terms about the number of plies until checkmate >values as "pointers" that show how to continue playing, it's all good. > >Dave Dave, Thanks. From this and also what Michel posted, I gather that a TB is some kind of ordered list based on some criteria that, once a root position is reached, is searched repeatedly for the next move. And it's structure is not like that of a tree. Steve
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.