Author: Ed Schröder
Date: 23:38:42 08/09/00
Go up one level in this thread
On August 09, 2000 at 11:34:36, leonid wrote: >On August 08, 2000 at 17:53:36, Ed Schröder wrote: > >>On August 08, 2000 at 11:55:12, Philippe Signoret wrote: >> >>>This is a position from a game I played against Fritz 5.32 in rated mode 2150 >>>elo >>>The move rook h4 is winning for black.But it takes a long time for programs to >>>find it: >>>30 min for Schredder4, and about 2 hours for Fritz or CM6000 >>> >>>k1bq2rr/p4p2/PpnBp3/3pP1p1/2pP1nB1/Q1P2N2/1RP2P1P/1R4K1 b - - >>> >>>Please try this position with other programs. >> >>[d]k1bq2rr/p4p2/PpnBp3/3pP1p1/2pP1nB1/Q1P2N2/1RP2P1P/1R4K1 b - - bm Rh4; >> >>Rebel Century 2.0 = 2:33 >>Rebel Century 3.0 (beta) = 1:05 >> >>Athlon 600 128 Mb >> >>Ed >> >> >>00:00 05.08 -0.11 1..Re8 2.Rb5 Nb8 3.Ra5 f6 >>00:01 06.12 0.09 1..Qd7 2.Rb5 Nb8 3.Ra5 f5 4.exf6 Bxa6 >>00:02 07.00 0.09 1..Qd7 2.Rb5 Nb8 3.Ra5 f5 4.exf6 Bxa6 >>00:04 08.00 0.00 1..Qd7 2.Kf1 Nb8 3.Rxb6 axb6 4.Rxb6 Nxa6 5.Rxa6+ Bxa6 >>6.Qxa6+ Qa7 7.Qc6+ Qb7 8.Qa4+ Qa7 9.Qc6+ Qb7 10.Qa4+ Qa7 >>00:07 08.12 0.02 1..Ne2+ 2.Kf1 Nxc3 3.Qxc3 f5 4.Bxf5 exf5 5.Qa3 g4 6.Qa4 >>00:09 09.00 0.26 1..Ne2+ 2.Kf1 Nxc3 3.Qxc3 f5 4.Bxf5 exf5 5.Qa3 Rh3 6.Rd1 >>00:19 10.00 0.41 1..Ne2+ 2.Kh1 Nxc3 3.Qxc3 f5 4.exf6 Qxd6 5.Qe3 Nd8 6.Ra1 Kb8 >>00:37 11.00 0.38 1..Ne2+ 2.Kh1 Nxc3 3.Qxc3 f5 4.exf6 Qxd6+ 5.Qe3 Rh7 6.Ra1 >>Nb4 7.f7 Rgh8 >>01:30 12.00 0.66 1..Ne2+ 2.Kh1 Nxc3 3.Qxc3 f5 4.exf6 Qxd6 5.Qe3 Rg6 6.h3 Bxa6 >>7.Nxg5 >>02:33 12.20 0.66 1..Rh4 >>05:57 12.20 2.69 1..Rh4 2.Nxh4 gxh4 3.Qa4 Rxg4+ 4.Kh1 Na5 5.Rg1 Rxg1+ [h8h4] >> >> >>00:00:03 8.00 0.15 1..Qd7 2.Rb5 Nb8 3.Ra5 Nxa6 4.Rxa6 >> Bxa6 5.Qxa6 f5 6.Bxf5 exf5 7.Rxb6 (2) (0.00) >> >>00:00:08 9.00 0.10 1..Qd7 2.Kf1 Rd8 3.Bb4 Nxb4 4.Rxb4 >> Kb8 5.Ke1 Qc7 6.Rb5 Ng2 (5) (0.00) >> >>00:00:18 10.00 0.10 1..Qd7 2.Kf1 Rd8 3.Bb4 Nxb4 4.Rxb4 >> Kb8 5.Ke1 Qc7 6.Rb5 Ng2 7.Kf1 (12) (0.00) >> >>00:00:38 10.17 0.10 1..Ne2+ >>00:00:39 10.17 0.34 1..Ne2+ 2.Kf1 Nxc3 3.Qxc3 f5 4.exf6 >> Qxd6 5.f7 Rg7 6.Ra2 Rxf7 (38) (0.00) >> >>00:00:48 11.00 0.46 1..Ne2+ 2.Kf1 Nxc3 3.Qxc3 f5 4.exf6 >> Qxd6 5.Re1 Rh7 6.Rbb1 Bxa6 7.Bxe6 (39) (0.00) >> >>00:01:05 11.19 0.46 1..Rh4 >>00:01:51 11.19 2.22 1..Rh4 2.Nxh4 gxh4 3.Qa4 Rxg4 4.Kh1 >> Bd7 5.Ba3 Rg2 6.Rb5 (65) (0.00) >> >>00:02:37 12.00 2.41 1..Rh4 2.Nxh4 gxh4 3.Qa4 Rxg4 4.Kh1 >> Bd7 5.h3 Nxh3 6.Rxb6 axb6 7.f3 Nxe5 (120) (0.00) >> >>00:10:20 13.00 3.17 1..Rh4 2.h3 Nxh3 3.Bxh3 Rxh3 4.Ne1 >> Nxd4 5.Qc5 Ne2 6.Kf1 Bd7 7.Qc7 Qxc7 >> 8.Bxc7 Nxc3 (371) (0.00) >> >>00:16:57 14.00 3.32 1..Rh4 2.h3 Nxh3 3.Bxh3 >>00:40:13 15.00 3.53 1..Rh4 2.Nxh4 > > >I am interested to know what is the branching factor for this position. >Branching factor when you search by brute force. I ran this position with default settings, no brute force involved. >Will say, by precaution, what is for me branching factor. If program take 1 >second to search position 5 ply ahead and 5 second for 6 plys, then branching >factor will be 5. That is how I see things too. >When I tried this position and white must move, then my branching factor was 5 >for almost all the plys below ply zero (root ply) and ply beyond it (ply 1). I >say almost all plys because few plys in my program are done in special way and >have distict branching factor. > >Reason for this question is the big difference that I see between my branching >factor and branching factor for main programs. The most frequently mine is too >bad. Hiarcs is nice exception that make me feel good. But why other programs >have so good branching factor? Maybe they do some search that is "good enough" >and that they boldly call "brute force search"? Or those programs use some >techincs that I never could find on my own? If you do a "brute force" search you usually get a branch factor of 4-6. Selective search is a way to lower the branch factor. Ed >Thanks for responding, >Leonid.
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.