Author: Bruce Moreland
Date: 12:11:45 12/24/00
Go up one level in this thread
On December 24, 2000 at 03:02:26, Uri Blass wrote: >On December 23, 2000 at 20:31:04, Joshua Lee wrote: > >>So far Fritz solves Position 2 but gandalf now at 1:11:35 doesn't why it is >>saying depth of 6 is beyond me. i will re-run this > >Gandalf has no chance to solve position number 2. > >This position is not for it and I am almost sure (based on analysis with it) >that Gandalf is not going to solve it in 24 hours on your hardware. > >I did not give Gandalf 24 hours but I pushed the position forward and I found >that Gandalf cannot see the problem in some hours even some plies after the >initial position. > >Uri Position 2 is easier than position 1, in my experience. On a quad Xeon 450, mine "solves" position 1 in under two minutes. I use "solves" in quotes, because it got the wrong mainline, had a big negative score, and Ne3 failed high a few moments later and changed the main line. In the next ply, at 3:42, it fails high but can't lock onto a main line. Finally, in ply 13, at 52 minutes, it find the correct answer for the right reasons, and resolves it with an approximately even score in about an hour and a half. I consider this as "solving" it with a little less strength on the quotation marks. Next ply at a bit under 4 hours it is at +1.6, and in ply 15, 8 hours, it is at +2. These are real solutions. I think we are outsearching Deep Thought, in general. I've had versions get position 2, with scores of +3, in a minute or two. It's possible to waste some time if you find that Bf6 draws first. Position 5 is a big challenge, but it's attainable, try that. Last time I ran that it took 35 hours on the quad machine to come back +4. I think other programs find it much faster, but it's still hard. There are a few in ECM that are in the Nolot category, as well. bruce
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.