Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 08:15:57 10/08/97
Go up one level in this thread
=====================================================================
CCC-I 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
bm bm bm bm bm bm bm bm bm am bm
Rxe6 Bxg7 Ng4 Nxf7 Rc3 Qxh6 Rh3+ Bd4+ Rxh7 Qxf3 b3
=====================================================================
7 DarkThought 0:00 0:12 2:31 ---- ---- 4:20 0:14 ?:?? ?:?? 4:42 0:21
8 Rebel9 2:09 0:18 0:42 1:07 ---- ---- 0:44 ---- 0:48 1:09 0:07
7 Fritz5 0:04 0:14 0:08 1:50 ---- ---- 2:11 ---- ---- 0:35 0:05
5 Arthur 0:09 0:09 0:57 ---- ---- ---- 0:12 ---- ---- ---- 0:06
4 Comet 0:02 0:02 3:18 ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ?:?? 4:28
3 CSTal ---- 0:02 0:14 ---- ---- ---- ---- 0:07 ---- ---- ----
=====================================================================
7 Crafty 13.4 4:41 0:15 1:50 ---- ---- 3:50 0:11 ---- ---- 0:00 0:29
couple of comments: position 9: I don't see the need for the
requirement
to "see the mate." For example, here is what Crafty sees:
11.229 Rxh7+ Kxh7 Qh5+ Kg8 Rxg7+ Kxg7 Bh6+ Kh7 Bg5+ Kg7 Qh6+ Kf7
Qf6+ Kg8 Qg6+ Kh8 Bf6+ Rxf6 exf6 Qxe1+ Kxe1 Nc2+ Kf1 Ne3+
fxe3 Rd7 Qe8+ Kh7 Qxd7+ Ne7 Qxe7+ Kg6 Qxb7 Kxf6
That is pretty compelling evidence that it understands why Rh7+ is a
good
move. It is not hard to make a program find such mates. But this
doesn't
have a lot to do with how well they pay chess.
For a comparison, take position 1. I doubt *any* of those programs saw
the tactical advantage or Re6 in a few seconds. But other moves are
-1.x,
and Rxe6 is -1.x, so this is a positional judgement. Later, they will
find
(maybe) that this is actually suddenly "even" in material, and not -1.
Why
count this right for positional reasons but then count the deep mates
wrong
if the mate is not found? Seems inconsistent for a tactical test.
Either
require that a program get a specific evaluation/PV for each position,
or
else count 'em right if they play the right move, period. But let's not
mix them up...
These were run on my P6/200, but with a small (12m) hash table. I don't
believe a bigger one would affect results.
here is the output for the position where it is necessary to avoid Qxh6:
12 0:55 0.000 Qxh6 Bxb4+ Kxb4 Nh5 Kc3 a5 h4 Ng3
h5
Nf5 hxg6 Nxh6 gxh6 hxg6
12 3:50 1.323 Qxe4 Bxb4+ Kxb4 a5+ Kxa5 Rh5 Qd5+
Kf8
Qd6+ Kf7 Qf6+ Kg8 Kb6 Rh4 Kc5 Rf4
Qd8+
Rf8 Qd5+ Rf7
Position 6 (Rc3) takes 5:30 on my P6/200 to find. On a PII/266 it gets
this one in under 5 minutes, but I left the times for the P6/200 as this
is a "standard" machine. On a 500mhz alpha, these are all divided by
roughly 2, based on the alpha I have tested on (actual DEC 21164/500
workstation.)
position 10 I don't like, because Crafty never liked Qxf3 at any point,
and stuck with Nc4 from ply 1 thru 11.
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.