Computer Chess Club Archives




Subject: Re: Mate in 38.

Author: Uri Blass

Date: 13:53:12 01/30/01

Go up one level in this thread

On January 30, 2001 at 13:53:04, Olaf Jenkner wrote:

>>You are the author of Gustav, correct?
>>I take this from the Gambit-Soft page.
>>From there I also deduce/guess that Gustav,
>>at least in its normal operation, is not so much a mate prover,
>>as a mate finder.
>>I.e. in that one second Gustav did not prove that there is no
>>shorter mate, or did it?
>>Still, below 1 seconds is quite impressive.
>Yes, it's a mate finder, you can prove mates too, but
>not faster then other programs.
>To program a mate prover is boring for me, because there can not
>much be done to save time. You have try ALL possible white moves.

You can use mate or repetition or stalemate finder for black in order to prove
that a move of white is not good so you do not have to try all possible white

>A mate finder can use heuristics to shorten the tree, and this
>is a interesting work.

A mate prover can also use heuristic to shorten the tree in most of the cases.
>There is a mate in 121 by Blathy where Gustav proved that there is
>no solution in 120 moves.
>[D]r1b5/1pKp4/pP1P1p1p/P4p1B/3pn2p/1P1k4/1P6/5N1N w - - 1 0

What is the solution and how did you prove that  there is no shorter solution?

This page took 0.02 seconds to execute

Last modified: Thu, 07 Jul 11 08:48:38 -0700

Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.