Author: Uri Blass
Date: 12:57:26 09/21/00
Go up one level in this thread
On September 21, 2000 at 14:36:34, John Merlino wrote: >On September 21, 2000 at 00:48:00, John Merlino wrote: > >>On September 20, 2000 at 14:31:25, Uri Blass wrote: >> >>>On September 20, 2000 at 14:12:25, John Merlino wrote: >>> >>>>On September 20, 2000 at 13:18:20, James wrote: >>>> >>>>>This position turns out to be an excellent comparitor ofd chessmaster versions. >>>>>My puter is 733 Piii, not overclocked with 512 meg of ram. Tested cm55 and cm6k >>>>>using cm default but with select 10, and ttables set to 30. results: >>>>>cm55 found mate in 14 at 33 min 45 seconds < about 20 sec into ply 13> and at 20 >>>>>seconds into ply 13, cm6k still found m n 16 at 58 minutes and 45 seconds. >>>>> My play formula on cm55 found it in 31 min and 30 seconds. Am sure other >>>>>programs could see it faster, if anyone does any comparitive tests on their >>>>>system, would be interested in the results. IF cm8000 is as efficient as cm55, >>>>>and has 12 ply selectivity, it could maybe see it in 10 minutes or so i think. >>>>> This position seems to be another that begs the question : what is a ply : ? >>>> >>>>What is the position? I can test it on a Beta build of CM8000.... >>>> >>>>jm >>> >>>[D]2r3kr/5pp1/7p/3PQRb1/ppq1B3/8/PPP3PP/1K1R4 w >>> >>>chessmaster6000(ss=10) found mate in 20 at depth 2/12,mate in 14 at depth 5/15 >>>and mate in 13 at depth 6/16 >>> >>>Uri >> >>As promised.... >> >>A beta build of Chessmaster 8000, running on my PIII-600, with only 128 MB RAM, >>and only a 1MB hash table, BUT with SS=12, announced mate in 23 after 39 minutes >>and 57 seconds. The announcement came at depth 13, after 258,350,432 positions >>had been seen (just under 108,000 positions/second). >> >>Admittedly, this test is not terribly useful if you are trying to compare >>results with YOUR testing, because of machine and some settings differences (and >>also because I had to actually WORK and couldn't leave the machine idle for some >>of the time). >> >>I'll try running another test overnight, with a 32MB hash table (the most I can >>afford on my machine). >> >>However, there you are.... >> >>jm > >The first thing I should mention is that my previous post was incorrect. CM8000 >did not announce mate in 23. It was, in fact, mate in 13. See the following >explanation for why I made this error.... > >So, I let it run overnight, with SS=12 and a 32MB hash table. CM8000 announced >mate in 14 at depth 13 in 24 minutes and 49 seconds, at about 162 million >positions. >Depth 14 was reached at 35:46, and mate in 14 was still the eval, but the PV had >changed (too long to bother with -- and the point was announcing mate). >Depth 15, reached after 2:24:49, announced mate in 13. >Depth 16, still showing mate in 13, was reached in 5:08:53 (2.1 billion >positions, approximately). >As of this writing, after about 13 1/2 hours, depth 17 has not been reached. > >Oddly enough, the EVAL of the PV at depth 13 was 99.73, which, in OLD versions >of Chessmaster (7000 and previous) would mean mate in 27. This vexed me greatly, >and begged the question why previous versions of The King announced a mating >line with fewer moves in the above position. Thanks to the "Visual Thinking" >Window, I have determined that the old Chessmaster method of scoring: > >(1 - eval) * 100 = mate in N In chessmaster6000 it should be: (100-eval)*100=N when the score is mate in N example:(100-99.90)*100=10 implies that 99.90 is mate in 10 > >no longer works. In CM8000: > >(1 - eval) * 100 = number of plies to mate again I guess that you mean (100-eval)*100 > >so the new math to determine mate in N would be > >(((1 - eval) * 100) + 1) / 2 = mate in N. again 100-eval and not 1-eval. Uri
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.