Author: Dann Corbit
Date: 10:35:53 10/23/01
Go up one level in this thread
On October 23, 2001 at 02:17:15, Nino wrote: [snip] >Hi Angrim, > >How are egtb's done if the position is not stored? (just curious) >Anyway I really dont know much about egtb's but I do know a little bit about >storing of epd positions and that the current method I think requires 192 bits >per position. I have just put together a table using Les's concept but for >storing chess positions. The table follows: > > Bits >Square Saved % saved > >1x3 50 78.1 >1x4 49 76.6 >1x5 48 75.0 >1x6 47 73.4 >1x7 46 71.9 >1x8 45 70.3 >2x3 47 73.4 >2x4 45 70.3 >2x5 43 67.2 >2x6 41 64.1 >2x7 39 60.9 >2x8 37 57.8 >3x1 50 78.1 >3x2 47 73.4 >3x3 44 68.8 >3x4 41 64.1 >3x5 38 59.4 >3x6 35 54.7 >3x7 32 50.0 >3x8 29 45.3 >4x1 49 76.6 >4x2 45 70.3 >4x3 41 64.1 >4x4 37 57.8 >4x5 33 51.6 >4x6 29 45.3 >4x7 25 39.1 >4x8 21 32.8 >5x1 48 75.0 >5x2 43 67.2 >5x3 38 59.4 >5x4 33 51.6 >5x5 28 43.8 >5x6 23 35.9 >5x7 18 28.1 >5x8 13 20.3 >6x1 47 73.4 >6x2 41 64.1 >6x3 35 54.7 >6x4 29 45.3 >6x5 23 35.9 >6x6 17 26.6 >6x7 11 17.2 >6x8 5 7.8 >7x1 46 71.9 >7x2 39 60.9 >7x3 32 50.0 >7x4 25 39.1 >7x5 18 28.1 >7x6 11 17.2 >7x7 4 6.3 >7x8 -3 -4.7 >8x1 45 70.3 >8x2 37 57.8 >8x3 29 45.3 >8x4 21 32.8 >8x5 13 20.3 >8x6 5 7.8 >8x7 -3 -4.7 >8x8 -11 -17.2 > >It is interesting to see the gains using this method. Remember to throw out the >7x8, 8x7 and 8x8 sets. Now those numbers might be interesting to ponder when it >comes to storing chess positions. Unless my math is wrong can someone tell me >if they see anything wrong with this approach? Mr Corbit?? I think it is a good idea, which compresses the 64 bit board image pretty well. My problem is I don't really know what Eugene does internally. To me, the tablebase is just a black box that spits out answers. Probably Eugene can address whether this notion will save anything or not.
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.