Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Mate in 1 - but Fritz 6 needs 1 hour!!!

Author: Heiner Marxen

Date: 11:54:29 08/13/00

Go up one level in this thread


On August 13, 2000 at 13:37:57, Colin Frayn wrote:

>On August 13, 2000 at 11:31:10, Adrien Regimbald wrote:
>
>>I was about to say "Yeah, I guess if you don't use anything like null move, etc
>>then you could be right" .. but then I saw that you use hash tables :P  I don't
>>think that I have to point out to you that the very fact that you're using hash
>>tables means you can't guarantee that your search is 100% accurate .. due to
>>possible collisions.
>
>Have you seen how I do hash tables?
>
>*grin*

I'm not sure, what the *grin* indicates, agreement or disagreement.
Could you clarify?  Do you hash exact positions?  (unlike everyone else,
except perhaps me?)

>>Well, that is a very impressive gain .. but I'm curious - does it hurt ColChess
>>overall to be doing this?
>
>Not that I'm aware of.  I don't think CM testing takes up any substantial time
>even in normal positions with no checkmates.  Testing for CM is quickest when it
>_isn't_ a CM as it only has to check a few moves.  My CM routine is pretty
>heavily optimised.

Now, that starts to get quite interesting for the author of a mate solver.
Would you care to share some details?
I assume your source is not open, but I'm just interested in the CM testing.


>Cheers,
>Col

Cheers,

Heiner Marxen   heiner@drb.insel.de     http://www.drb.insel.de/~heiner/



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.