Author: Hermano Ecuadoriano
Date: 08:28:28 02/05/01
Go up one level in this thread
On February 05, 2001 at 10:57:14, Hermano Ecuadoriano wrote:
>On February 05, 2001 at 09:46:59, Paul wrote:
>
>>Hi!
>>
>>One last message from me on the subject, since I think I know now what made you
>>hesitant and wanted to share this to help clear out all the confusion forever.
>>
>>1. When a program finds a mate in *favor* of itself, so mating the opponent,
>>it's immediately an upper bound on the real matescore, so with more time the
>>announcement stays the same or gets lower (M78 ... M54 ... etc).
>>
>>2. When a program finds a mate *against* itself, so mating itself, and it stays
>>that way until the end of ply (when all the moves of that ply have been
>>examined), it's also an upper bound on the real matescore, so with more time the
>>announcement stays the same or gets lower (M78 ... M54 ... etc).
>>
>>Now, there are 2 interesting cases:
>>
>>1. Before the winning side finds a mate in favor of itself, it can even find a
>>mate against itself, but that will have disappeared by the end of the ply it
>>found this mate on.
>>
>>2. Before the losing side finds a mate against itself, it can have found lower
>>mates against itself, but again, those will have disappeared by the end of the
>>ply in question.
>>
>>Hope this helps a bit!
>>
>>Groetjes,
>>Paul
>
>I gave a clear counterexample.
O.K. I understand the question raised about the crafty output I snipped.
To save my credibility, I had to figure out why that -> wasn't there.
With noise= 1, to show everything, the .log shows
snip
Black(1): go
end-game phase
clearing hash tables
time surplus 0.00 time limit 10:00 (10:00)
nss depth time score variation (1)
1-> 0.01 0.00 Ng5
2 0.02 0.00 Ng5 Bb8
2-> 0.03 0.00 Ng5 Bb8
3 0.03 0.00 Ng5 Bb8 Kh7
3-> 0.06 0.00 Ng5 Bb8 Kh7
4 0.13 0.00 Ng5 Bb8 Kh7 Bc7
4-> 0.14 0.00 Ng5 Bb8 Kh7 Bc7
5 0.28 0.01 Ng5 Bf4 Nh3 Bxh6+ <HT>
5 0.31 0.00 Kg8 Be5 Ng5 Be8 Nh3
5-> 0.31 0.00 Kg8 Be5 Ng5 Be8 Nh3
6 0.33 0.00 Kg8 Be5 Ng5 Be8 Nh3 Bd7
6-> 0.35 0.00 Kg8 Be5 Ng5 Be8 Nh3 Bd7
7 0.68 0.01 Kg8 Be5 Ng5 Bf4 Kg7 Bxg5 <HT>
7-> 0.78 0.01 Kg8 Be5 Ng5 Bf4 Kg7 Bxg5 <HT>
8 0.92 0.01 Kg8 Be5 Ng5 Bf4 Kg7 Bxg5 <HT>
8-> 0.93 0.01 Kg8 Be5 Ng5 Bf4 Kg7 Bxg5 <HT>
9 1.21 -- Kg8
9 1.54 Mat68 Kg8 Kg6 Ng5 Be2 Ne6 Kxh6 <HT>
9 2.06 ++ Ng5!!
9 2.31 0.01 Ng5 Be5+ Kh7 Bf4 Nh3 Bxh6 <HT>
9-> 2.34 0.01 Ng5 Be5+ Kh7 Bf4 Nh3 Bxh6 <HT>
10 3.34 0.01 Ng5 Be5+ Kh7 Bf4 Nh3 Bxh6 <HT>
10-> 3.39 0.01 Ng5 Be5+ Kh7 Bf4 Nh3 Bxh6 <HT>
snip
With noise= 100000, which I did only to simplify the example, the .log shows:
snip
Black(1): go
end-game phase
time surplus 0.00 time limit 1000:00 (1000:00)
nss depth time score variation (1)
9 0.70 Mat68 Kg8 Kg6 Ng5 Be2 Ne6 Kxh6 <HT>
10 1.34 0.01 Ng5 Be5+ Kh7 Bf4 Nh3 Bxh6 <HT>
10-> 1.35 0.01 Ng5 Be5+ Kh7 Bf4 Nh3 Bxh6 <HT>
snip
I posted this in total innocence.
I don't know why the -> line isn't there.
I was trying to be helpful. I found what I thought was a counterexample,
and tried to explain it.
I mean it this time: I quit posting anything except my opinions.
Best wishes.
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.