Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 08:55:43 01/23/01
Go up one level in this thread
On January 22, 2001 at 17:13:17, Uri Blass wrote: >On January 22, 2001 at 16:02:56, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On January 22, 2001 at 14:55:49, Peter Berger wrote: >> >>>A tough position it seems . >>> >>>Although none of them is "mine" , a try : >>> >>>"Bringer" >>> >>>0:00:00.1 ( 4/12) 3891 4.87 f6-e6 d7-f7 f5-f6 >>>0:00:00.2 ( 5/13) 17765 4.83 f6-e6 d7-f7 h2-h4 a5-a4 e6xf7 g8xf7 >>>e5-e6 f7-e7 h4-h5 >>>0:00:00.5 ( 6/15) 58783 4.72 f6-e6 d7-f7 h2-h4 a5-a4 e6xf7 g8xf7 >>>e5-e6 f7-e7 >>>0:00:00.7 ( 6/16) 86563 4.73 f6-g6 >>>0:00:01.9 ( 7/18) 212939 4.72 f6-g6 g8-f8 g6-h6 f8-g8 h6-e6 >>>0:00:05.1 ( 8/23) 645145 4.74 f6-g6 g8-f8 g6-h6 f8-g8 h6-e6 >>>0:00:13.4 ( 9/27) 1869222 4.61 f6-g6 g8-f8 g6-h6 f8-g8 h6-e6 >>>0:00:17.1 ( 9/27) 2428949 4.63 f6-e6 d7xe6 f5xe6 g8-f8 >>>0:00:29.8 (10/30) 4346163 4.23 f6-e6 d7xe6 >>>0:00:30.8 (10/30) 4559520 3.83 f6-e6 d7xe6 >>>0:00:32.7 (10/30) 4871934 1.97 f6-e6 d7xe6 f5xe6 g8-f8 d5-d6 c7xd6 >>>e5xd6 a5-a4 h1-g1 b4-b3 a2xb3 a4-a3 d6-d7 >>>0:00:41.8 (10/30) 6179798 1.98 f6-g6 >>>0:00:42.7 (10/30) 6346445 2.48 f6-g6 >>>0:01:34.8 (10/36) 13206630 2.49 e5-e6 >>>0:01:44.8 (10/36) 14944128 2.99 e5-e6 >>>0:02:03.3 (10/36) 17506577 3.00 f6-g5 >>>0:02:28.9 (10/36) 21440299 3.35 f6-g5 g8-f8 d5-d6 >>>0:03:57.7 (11/36) 34278234 3.26 f6-g5 g8-f8 d5-d6 >>> >>>So , Bringer might be lucky and avoid it at fast blitz time control but needs 43 >>>secs to avoid it for the right reasons it seems . >>> >>>In fact this position is a hard challenge for the commercials, too : >>> >>>"Century 3" >>> >>>00:00:24 11.00 10.63 1.De6+ Dxe6 2.fxe6 Kf8 3.d6 cxd6 >>> 4.exd6 a4 5.d5 a3 6.d7 Ke7 7.h4 >>> b3 8.d6 Kd8 (23) (0.00) >>> >>>00:00:50 12.00 8.02 1.De6+ Dxe6 2.fxe6 Kf8 3.d6 cxd6 >>> 4.exd6 a4 5.d5 a3 6.d7 Ke7 7.h3 >>> b3 8.d6 Kxe6 9.d8 (32) (0.00) >>> >>>00:03:00 13.00 0.44 1.De6+ Dxe6 2.fxe6 Kf8 3.Kg2 a4 >>> 4.d6 (159) (0.00) >>> >>>No news after 15 minutes , so probably Rebel can't avoid it at tournament time >>>control . >>> >>>Both tried on PIII500 . >>> >>>pete >> >> >>The problem is endgame knowledge. A program _ought_ to know that if you have >>a passer, then trade pieces to reach a won ending. Only in this case, that >>heuristic back-fires as it is black who ends up winning. This is a _tough_ >>exception to handle... >> >>although a GM would tell you instantly "No I won't trade queens..." > >IM's and FM's would also say it instantly. > >> >>And no, there is no point in starting another "is the computer a GM?" >>thread. So long as they can fall for these positions, the answer is pretty >>obvious. > >No. > >By the same logic you could claim that they are also not IM's and not FM's. > >The only test is games and Rebel proved that it can win a match of 6 games >against a GM so it seems to be better than part of the GM's inspite of some >weaknesses. > >Uri If you watch games on ICC, you will see that this is the _most_ common way programs lose. They simply don't realize that they are lost until it is too late. Such as this case where trading queens for white is fatal, but white does it due to other knowledge calling for the trade even though it actually loses. These positions are not as rare as you think. That is why I spent a year doing the majority/candidate stuff. I got tired of one particular GM complaining about it overlooking something pretty obvious. I'm only glad he didn't play _this_ game against Crafty as it is more complicated to fix this case. But I _will_ fix it sooner or later... it _has_ to be fixed.
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.