Author: Heiner Marxen
Date: 14:09:35 05/04/01
Go up one level in this thread
On May 04, 2001 at 16:05:36, leonid wrote: >On May 04, 2001 at 15:38:23, Angrim wrote: > >>On May 04, 2001 at 10:26:02, leonid wrote: >> >>>Hello! >>> >>>Had bad lack this midnight when one call came from my work. It took me 20 >>>minutes to do it but I went to my bed only at 2 o'clock. One good result from >>>broken sleep was this position that you can try to solve. It probably will >>>demand one sleepless night from your program, if you will insist on shortest >>>mate. >>> >>>[D]RnqkqnR1/qBNbNBq1/QqQqQqQ1/BrQqQrB1/3q4/8/3Q4/3K4 w- - >>> >>>Please indicate your result. >>> >>>Thanks, >>>Leonid. >> >>this one IS tough, Chest agrees: there is no mate in 12, as found in 2.1 hours (K7/600, 350MB). >> wonder if having endgame tables would help a lot? > >Never! :-) :-) There are 16+15 = 31 men on the board. A mate in 12 is 23 plies deep, so we are left with 31-23 = 8 men at least for a terminal position in such a search. You have to go some moves deeper before there is a chance that 6-piece tables may help. >>I'll leave my proof number searcher running while I'm at work, maybe it >>will find an answer in a few hours.. currently its obsessing over Qxd7. > >Everything depend on each program branching factor. Two professional that I >tried until now (they are not specialized in solving mate nut never hung on you) >were slow. The every next program could have very good branching factor for this >position. I had the chance to see very good on mine, mainly for brute force. >Selective was slow. It took this in 10 min 42 sec. Celeron 600Mhz. No hash. > >Leonid. Well, the effective branching factor is quite good for Chest. Here is the timing for the increasing depths: seconds # 1 0.00 0.87 1- 0 # 2 0.00 1.00 1- 0 # 3 0.00 0.95 70- 0 # 4 0.08 1.07 465- 0 # 5 0.37 1.27 2085- 0 # 6 1.46 1.57 7901- 0 # 7 6.32 2.09 34402- 0 # 8 25.78 2.57 141569- 0 # 9 87.41 3.28 500658- 0 # 10 478.70 3.56 2712514- 478 # 11 1570.93 4.26 8976242- 1058845 # 12 7659.24 3.73 44489747- 35741846 depth 7-> 8: 4.079 depth 8-> 9: 3.390 depth 9->10: 5.476 depth 10->11: 3.281 depth 11->12: 4.875 It changes a bit up and down, but stays between 3 and 5.5 so far, which is not bad for such a crowded board and 69 initial legal moves. But no cigar, yet. >>proven that lots of the other moves lose already though. >>proved that 26 of the other moves lose after 10 minutes search.. >> >>Angrim Yes, for (nearly) all partial mate-in-3 Chest tried to mate the attacker directly in 1 move, which succeeded in 16.2% of the cases. A more sophisticated heuristic might succeed in many more cases. Now, Leonid, should I go on? Depth 13 and 14 will take around 9 hours and 1.5 days! What is your shortest (selective) solution? Cheers, Heiner
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.