Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Mate study -- who's wrong: David Paulowich or Chest 3.19?

Author: Heiner Marxen

Date: 09:21:10 01/03/01

Go up one level in this thread


On January 03, 2001 at 09:25:29, leonid wrote:

>On January 02, 2001 at 21:22:01, Dann Corbit wrote:
>>Under standard chess, it is a mate in 11 (as shown above correctly by Chest).
>
>Is is still pretty good. Search by brute force 11 moves deep should take pretty
>long time to solve. It probably used some kind of selective search and
>successfully.

K6-2/400 with 10MB hash: 374 sec
PIII/550 with 30+MB hash: 177 sec
Speed factor for hash (transposition table): 35.6 (conservative estimate).

You should really use a transposition table for positions with so few pieces,
it makes a great difference (hint, hint :-).  More memory then also helps.

Here are the move execution counts for the different levels (depth in moves):

mvx 11:        18        22  [18.000  1.222] mvskip  lvskip
mvx 10:       468       216  [21.273  0.462]
mvx  9:      5121      1400  [23.708  0.273]     79
mvx  8:     29838      5123  [21.313  0.172]   1088       1
mvx  7:     85729     13523  [16.734  0.158]   4948      45
mvx  6:    211779     35455  [15.661  0.167]  15705     103
mvx  5:    512410     96046  [14.452  0.187]  62779     368
mvx  4:   1325249    303453  [13.798  0.229] 171602    1027
mvx  3:   3751315   1617681  [12.362  0.431]    459       1
mvx  2:   2386674   1787280  [ 1.475  0.749]
mvx  1:     56337         0  [ 0.032       ]

In [..] you find the quotients between successive plies.

(EGTBs are even better, of course)

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.