Author: Uri Blass
Date: 07:34:33 03/11/01
Go up one level in this thread
On March 11, 2001 at 10:29:36, leonid wrote: >On March 11, 2001 at 01:02:52, Uri Blass wrote: > >>On March 10, 2001 at 19:48:24, leonid wrote: >> >>>On March 10, 2001 at 18:27:05, Uri Blass wrote: >>> >>>>On March 10, 2001 at 18:03:46, Ingo Bauer wrote: >>>> >>>>>On March 10, 2001 at 08:11:29, leonid wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>Hi! >>>>>> >>>>>>If you like to solve one light mate then you can try this: >>>>>> >>>>>>[D]nqNBNqn1/2QKQ3/Nq3qN1/n1rkr1n1/R1NbN1R1/1n1q1n2/8/Q2B2Q1 w - - >>>>>> >>>>>>Please, indicate your result. >>>>>> >>>>>>Thanks, >>>>>>Leonid. >>>>>Hello >>>>>This is the Result of Gandalf4.32h on a Celeron@850! The time is nice too! >>>>> >>>>>Engine: Gandalf 4.32hUCI >>>>>von Steen Suurballe >>>>>Position: >>>>> 1.05 0:00 -3.88++ 1.S4xf6+ (142.189) 284.3 >>>>> 1.05 0:00 0.00 1.S4xf6+ Sxf6+ 2.Sxf6+ Dbxf6 (275.085) 275.0 >>>>> 1.06 0:01 +0.01++ 1.S4xb6+ (276.381) 251.2 >>>>> 1.06 0:01 +0.01 1.S4xf6+ Sxf6+ 2.Sxf6+ Dbxf6 (394.592) 263.0 >>>>> 1.26 0:06 +0.01++ 1.Dgxd4+ (1.879.540) 268.5 >>>>> 1.26 0:07 +3.60 1.Dgxd4+ Dxd4 2.S4xf6+ Sxf6+ 3.Sxf6+ Dbxf6 4.Lxf3+ Sxf3 >>>>>5.Txd4+ Sbxd4 6.Dexc5+ Ke4 (1.961.678) 268.7 >>>>> 1.27 0:07 +3.61++ 1.Daxd4+ (1.966.070) 269.3 >>>>> 1.27 0:07 +3.61 1.Dgxd4+ Dxd4 2.S4xf6+ Sxf6+ 3.Sxf6+ Dbxf6 4.Lxf3+ Sxf3 >>>>>5.Txd4+ Sbxd4 6.Dexc5+ Ke4 (1.969.856) 269.8 >>>>> 2.01 0:07 +3.60 1.Dgxd4+ Dxd4 2.S4xf6+ Sxf6+ 3.Sxf6+ Dbxf6 4.Lxf3+ Sxf3 >>>>>5.Txd4+ Sbxd4 6.Dexc5+ Ke4 (2.003.867) 267.1 >>>>> 2.03 0:07 +3.61++ 1.S4xf6+ (2.019.851) 269.3 >>>>> 2.03 0:07 +5.90++ 1.S4xf6+ (2.022.325) 266.0 >>>>> 2.01 0:07 +3.60 1.S4xf6+ Sxf6+ 2.Sxf6+ Dbxf6 3.Txd4+ Dxd4 4.Lxf3+ Sxf3 >>>>>5.Dgxd4+ Sbxd4 6.Dexc5+ Ke4 (2.041.855) 268.6 >>>>> 2.04 0:07 +3.61++ 1.S4xb6+ (2.042.840) 268.7 >>>>> 2.04 0:07 +3.61 1.S4xf6+ Sxf6+ 2.Sxf6+ Dbxf6 3.Txd4+ Dxd4 4.Lxf3+ Sxf3 >>>>>5.Dgxd4+ Sbxd4 6.Dexc5+ Ke4 (2.052.184) 266.5 >>>>> 3.01 0:09 +4.09++ 1.S4xf6+ (2.705.746) 270.5 >>>>> 3.01 0:10 +4.57++ 1.S4xf6+ (2.710.708) 268.3 >>>>> 3.01 0:10 +5.53++ 1.S4xf6+ (2.749.869) 269.5 >>>>> 3.01 0:10 +5.90 1.S4xf6+ Sxf6+ 2.Sxf6+ Dbxf6 3.Lxf3+ Sxf3 4.Dxb8 Sxg1 >>>>>5.Sxf8 Txe7+ 6.Sxe7+ Dxe7+ 7.Lxe7 Lxa1 8.Dxa8+ Sc6 (2.872.619) 268.4 >>>>> 3.02 0:10 +5.91++ 1.S4xb6+ (2.918.454) 267.7 >>>>> 3.02 0:11 +5.91 1.S4xf6+ Sxf6+ 2.Sxf6+ Dbxf6 3.Lxf3+ Sxf3 4.Dxb8 Sxg1 >>>>>5.Sxf8 Txe7+ 6.Sxe7+ Dxe7+ 7.Lxe7 Lxa1 8.Dxa8+ Sc6 (3.022.499) 267.4 >>>>> 4.01 0:41 +7.66++ 1.S4xf6+ (11.588.388) 278.5 >>>>> 4.01 0:42 +9.40++ 1.S4xf6+ (12.001.613) 279.1 >>>>> 4.01 0:44 +12.89++ 1.S4xf6+ (12.359.861) 279.0 >>>>> 4.01 0:45 +19.86++ 1.S4xf6+ (12.690.370) 279.5 >>>>> 4.01 0:45 +33.82++ 1.S4xf6+ (12.757.582) 279.7 >>>>> 4.01 0:45 +61.72++ 1.S4xf6+ (12.761.755) 279.2 >>>>> 4.01 0:55 +M8 1.S4xf6+ Sxf6+ 2.Sxf6+ Dbxf6 3.Dgxd4+ Dxd4 4.Dxd4+ Sfxd4 >>>>>5.Dexe5+ Dxe5 6.Dxe5+ Dxe5 7.S8b6+ Sxb6+ 8.Sxb6+ (15.992.615) 288.1 >>>>> >>>>>Bye Ingo >>>> >>>>Junior5.9 can see mate in 8 after 25 seconds on p200 so the time of Gandalf4.32h >>>>is not so good. >>> >>>This is not that clear. Previous prgoram could look for solution by brute force >>>and then its time is excellent. But if your program looked by brute force and >>>found mate in 25 seconds then it is the best for sure. >>> >>>Actual time for selective search could be very much below of brute force search. >>>This is true almost for every position. This position my program solve by brute >>>force in almost two minutes but take it by selective (also 8 moves) in only two >>>seconds. >>> >>>Leonid. >> >>Both Gandalf and Junior are playing programs so they did not look for mate by >>brute force. >> >>Uri > >Maybe! I remember that I used for some time Genius 2 and Chess Master 4000. Both >of them were able to find practically all result in impecable way. This is why I >presume that they used somewhere brute force search. It could be that they used >in the same time some selective search for start. In few occasions thay were >very quick in their solutions. > >My program, on default search, look for mate in two different ways. So even >before brute search (if was not said otherwise) it will try its selective >search. It could be that many other programs will do the same. I presume also >that Heiner program search very often by brute force. Heiner's program(Chest) always searches by brute force. When it finds mate in 8 it means that there is no shorter mate. Chess playing program do not do it and when they say mate in 8 there could be a shorter mate that they did not see. Gandalf says depth 4.01 when it finds mate in 8 and I guess that it means that it only searched for depth 4 by brute force when even this brute force can include some null move pruning. Uri
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.