Author: leonid
Date: 14:45:47 04/14/01
Go up one level in this thread
On April 14, 2001 at 16:43:23, Paul wrote: >On April 14, 2001 at 16:10:03, leonid wrote: > >>On April 14, 2001 at 11:25:53, Paul wrote: >> >>>Will try some different extensions later ... >> >>I hope so. I know that this position look like very deep. Mine found mate in 13 >>but I was not able to solve it by brute force in order to know shortest mate. In >>9 moves there is no mate for sure. I went even to search for 10 moves, since >>branching factor happened to be good for brute force. But when 10 moves took >>more then 1 hour, I left search. I needed computer. Also I saw that branching >>factor became bad for 10 moves. Expected time for 10 moves was 45 minutes. I >>waited already for 1 hour. Maybe somebody with better selective search, or >>better branching factor, for brute force, will reach mate below 13. I am curious >>to know what is shortest mate here. > >Well, I tried some different things, but didn't find anything shorter. I don't >have much time now, coz I'm in the middle of yet another windows reinstall. :) > >Ciao! >Paul Hi, Paul! After my last message put my computer to work. I found that mate in 10 don't existe. Took 1 h 11 min. Before I was very close to respose for 10 moves. So, mate should be between 11 and 13 moves. I am not sure if I will ask my computer to search for 11. Branching factor slightly jumped for 10 moves and now 11 moves expected to take (on 600Mhz) 8 hours. For 12 moves I can't even dream. Only much speedier computer and program that use a lot of hash could go that far. I still hope that somebody will come with final response. Salut, Leonid.
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.