Author: Uri Blass
Date: 04:28:23 08/17/01
Go up one level in this thread
On August 17, 2001 at 07:01:23, leonid wrote: >On August 16, 2001 at 22:23:32, Heiner Marxen wrote: > >>On August 16, 2001 at 21:21:22, leonid wrote: >> >>>On August 16, 2001 at 19:49:56, Heiner Marxen wrote: >>> >>>>On August 16, 2001 at 19:00:56, Uri Blass wrote: >>>> >>>>>On August 16, 2001 at 18:58:17, Uri Blass wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>On August 16, 2001 at 16:47:03, Heiner Marxen wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>On August 16, 2001 at 12:03:51, leonid wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>Hi! >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>This position is intended to be solvable by every program, after only minor >>>>>>>>resistance. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>1rrbbq2/3k4/1qqpnq2/3B4/2NPR3/1QB1KQ2/QN3PQQ/Q5QR w - - >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>Please indicate your result. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>Thanks, >>>>>>>>Leonid. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Hello Leonid! >>>>>>> >>>>>>>You should try to find titles for your beautiful creations! >>>>>>>For this one I suggest "The King", for obvious reasons :-) >>>>>>> >>>>>>>I've not yet worked on this new creation of yours, since my K7/600 after >>>>>>>60 hours is still busy crunching on your corrected "US". >>>>>>>http://www.icdchess.com/forums/1/message.shtml?183489 >>>>[D]B2B1qr1/N2Qb2q/Q2Rq3/Q2Q1q2/Q2Q2q1/Q2Q3n/R2Qq2k/1KN2rq1 w - - >>>>>>>I know, you warned us :-) but I thought that would not apply to Chest. >>>>>>>That there is no mate in 8 needed only 40 minutes with an apparent EBF >>>>>>>below 10, so I expected less than 10 hours. But this one is a hard nut >>>>>>>for Chest. >>>>>> >>>>>>I understand that chest is working on finding if there is a mate in 9 >>>>>>Chessmaster6000(ss=10) can see mate in 12 in 7:20 at depth 1/6(PIII850) >>>>>> >>>>>>Uri >>>>> >>>>>It can see even mate in 11 in 16:58 at depth 1/7 >>>>>The move is d2-e2 >>>>> >>>>>Uri >>>> >>>>Hello Uri! >>>> >>>>Thanks for the info! >>>>I expect Chest to find a mate in 9, here, but I have to wait until it is >>>>completely done (64 hours and still busy...). >>>>Ah, yes, d2-e2 is one of those moves, where the tree explodes for Chest. >>>> >>>>We'll see... I will report, of course... until then... >>>> >>>>Cheers, >>>>Heiner >>> >>>Heiner, from what move exactly branching went up? On mine is started growing >>>just from 6. It could be that I just stopped where it must explode. >>> >>>If you want to glace brute force: >>> >>>Moves Time Branching factor NPS >>> >>>4 1.26sec 77k >>> 6.65 >>>5 8.4 sec 120k >>> 6.63 >>>6 55.77 124k >>> 8.78 >>>7 8min 3sec 116k >>> 8.17 >>>8 1 hour 5 min 48 sec >>> >>>Cheers, >>>Leonid. >> >>Here is my data: >> >>depth time EBF[T] EBF[N] >># 1 0.00s 0kN 0.87 1- 0 >># 2 0.00s 0kN 1.00 1- 0 >># 3 0.03s 2kN [ 19.55] 0.96 94- 0 >># 4 0.49s [ 16.33] 26kN [ 12.46] 1.02 1721- 0 >># 5 5.79s [ 11.82] 272kN [ 10.44] 1.14 24491- 0 >># 6 39.83s [ 6.88] 1741kN [ 6.40] 1.40 171448- 0 >># 7 254.16s [ 6.38] 11262kN [ 6.47] 1.70 1091347- 1 >># 8 2375.96s [ 9.35] 109788kN [ 9.75] 1.93 9380661- 1310495 >> >>First, it went down, nicely, but then it started climbing somewhat, >>and the next one is at least 88 ! Uuh. >>Its still running, over 66 hours already. > > >This is the next position that indicate that my specialized plys are still not >that efficent. When your solve 4 moves in only one half of one second, mine went >beyond one. My NPS is double of your. This is the next indication that efficency >is below of what it should be. > >My expectation is that hash do very little for specialized plys since they are >already very optimized. Something to verify later. > >For me is there no chances to look 9 moves for more that 10 hours but still I am >curious how much internal structure of given position influence its branching >factor. Will try to put this position later for 10 hours run. > >Maybe it will be interesting for you to know exactly time for other and good >programs for this position. First for certain program where I put hash to zero. > >3 moves took 4 seconds. >4 moves took 7 min and 31 sec. > >Second was specialized engin for solving mate. It not permit to disconnect its >hash completely. Could see only for 4 moves. It took 1 min and 18 sec. Five >moves time I could not see since mate engin exploded. I believe that you used the wrong engines. Even the mate solver of an old program like Genius2 is faster in seeing no mate in 4. 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.