Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Kasparov vs Deep Blue, DIEP not as bad as DeepBlue

Author: Vincent Diepeveen

Date: 04:24:39 10/30/01

Go up one level in this thread


On October 29, 2001 at 23:27:37, Dann Corbit wrote:

>On October 29, 2001 at 22:17:12, K. Burcham wrote:
>
>>
>>in this position, Deep Blue plays 22...g4.
>>shredder5 in this position would play 22...Bg6, at depth 17/34
>>what does your program play, with deep search?
>>
>>
>>(1) Kasparov,G - Deep Blue [A07]
>>IBM Man vs Machine New York (1), 03.05.1997
>>[John Nunn]
>>
>>
>> [D] 3rr1k1/1p1n1p2/1qp2n1p/p1b1p1pb/4P3/PP2N1PP/1BP2PB1/R1Q1RNK1 b - -

00:00 0 0 44 (0) 1 -0.604 Bc5xe3 Nf1xe3
00:00 0 0 50 (0) 1 -0.076 Re8-e7
00:00 0 0 51 (0) 1 -0.001 Qb6-b5
00:00 0 0 53 (0) 1 0.053 Qb6-a6
00:00 0 0 54 (0) 1 0.095 Nd7-f8
00:00 0 0 71 (0) 1 0.261 Kg8-g7
00:00 0 0 146 (0) 2 -0.355 Kg8-g7 Ne3-f5 Kg7-h7
++ g8-f8
00:00 0 0 339 (0) 2 -0.348 Kg8-f8 Ne3-f5
++ a5-a4
00:00 0 0 437 (0) 2 -0.345 a5-a4 Ne3-c4
00:00 0 0 977 (48) 3 0.071 a5-a4 Nf1-d2 Qb6-a6
++ g8-f8
00:00 0 0 1315 (48) 3 0.096 Kg8-f8 Bb2-c3 Kf8-g7
00:00 0 0 2607 (384) 4 -0.287 Kg8-f8 Bb2-c3 Bc5-d4 Ne3-c4
++ a5-a4
++ d7-f8
++ h5-g6
00:00 0 0 7774 (874) 4 -0.101 Bh5-g6 Ne3-g4 Nf6xg4 h3xg4
00:00 0 0 18465 (3057) 5 -0.100 Bh5-g6 Nf1-d2 Kg8-g7 Nd2-c4 Qb6-c7
++ g8-f8
00:00 0 0 24519 (3808) 5 -0.006 Kg8-f8 Nf1-d2 Bc5xe3 Re1xe3 Nd7-c5
++ d7-f8
++ g8-h7
00:00 0 0 61287 (13085) 6 -0.428 Kg8-f8 Nf1-d2 a5-a4 b3xa4 Bc5-d4 Nd2-c4 Bd4xb2
Nc4xb2
++ h5-g6
00:01 0 0 88405 (27572) 6 0.016 Bh5-g6 Nf1-d2 Qb6-c7 a3-a4 Kg8-g7 Ne3-f5 Bg6xf5
e4xf5
00:02 0 0 185642 (27572) 7 0.016 Bh5-g6 Nf1-d2 Qb6-c7 a3-a4 Kg8-g7 Ne3-f5 Bg6xf5
 e4xf5
00:03 0 0 300465 (30800) 8 -0.209 Bh5-g6 Nf1-d2 Qb6-c7 Ne3-f5 Bg6xf5 e4xf5 Kg8-g
7 Nd2-c4
++ d7-f8
++ b6-a7
00:25 0 0 2661523 (950211) 9 0.005 Bh5-g6 Nf1-d2 Kg8-g7 Nd2-c4 Qb6-c7 Bb2-c3 Nd7
-b6 Bc3xa5 Nf6xe4
00:40 0 0 4458027 (1325961) 10 -0.040 Bh5-g6 Nf1-d2 Kg8-g7 Nd2-c4 Qb6-c7 Ne3-f5
Bg6xf5 e4xf5 b7-b5 Nc4-e3 Nd7-b6
01:46 0 0 12454596 (4061616) 11 -0.125 Bh5-g6 Nf1-d2 Kg8-h7 Nd2-c4 Qb6-c7 Ne3-f5
 Bg6xf5 e4xf5 e5-e4 Nc4-e3 Nd7-e5 Re1-d1
04:13 0 0 30432823 (7331515) 12 -0.125 Bh5-g6 Nf1-d2 Qb6-c7 Ne3-f5 Kg8-h7 Nd2-c4
 Bg6xf5 e4xf5 e5-e4 Kg1-f1 b7-b6 a3-a4 Qc7-b7
11:29 0 0 82720871 (10080646) 13 -0.124 Bh5-g6 Nf1-d2 Qb6-c7 Ne3-f5 Kg8-h7 Nd2-c
4 Bg6xf5 e4xf5 e5-e4 Kg1-f1 b7-b6 a3-a4 Nd7-f8
46:04 0 0 327781499 (111597415) 14 -0.078 Bh5-g6 Nf1-d2 Qb6-c7 a3-a4 Kg8-h7 Ne3-
c4 Nd7-b6 Nc4xa5 Bc5-b4 c2-c3 Bb4xa5 b3-b4 Nb6-d7 b4xa5 Nd7-c5 h3-h4

Diep doesn't consider the bad move g5-g4.

>>
>>"The computer desperately seeks to disturb White's plan.
>
>The computer has no concept of desperation.
>
>>Although this move
>>creates further kingisde weaknesses, it enable Black to develop some piece
>>activity. This is the critical phase. Everybody who has played a computer knows
>>the scenario: you get a strategically winning position, the computer makes some
>>desperate tactical lunge, you make a couple of inaccuracies and suddenly the
>>machine is all over you". (comment by Frederic Friedel)
>No argument there!

For those who tactical mistakes that's definitely true. For GMs that's not
exactly true though. They got their GM because they can play a perfect game!

>ChessMaster 8000 output:
>
>Time	Depth	Score	Positions	Moves
>0:00	1/3	-0.04	2059		1...Bd4 2. Nd2 Bg6
>0:00	2/6	0.02	42104		1...Bd4 2. Nd2 Bg6 3. c3 Bc5 4.
>					Qc2 Nf8
>0:01	3/7	0.16	124547		1...Bd4 2. Nd2 Bg6 3. c3 Bc5 4.
>					Qc2 Nf8 5. Ndc4
>0:03	3/7	0.09	268740		1...g4 2. h4 Bg6 3. Qd2 Nf8 4.
>					Qe2 a4 5. Nd2 Bxe3 6. fxe3 axb3
>					7. cxb3
>0:06	3/8	0.10	598533		1...g4 2. Nd2 gxh3 3. Bxh3 Qc7
>					4. c4 Bd4 5. Nf5 Nc5 6. Nxh6+ Kg7
>0:10	3/8	0.02	981004		1...Bg6 2. Nd2 Qc7 3. Bc3 b5 4.
>					b4 Bd4 5. Qb2
>0:18	4/9	0.15	1798706		1...Bg6 2. Nd2 Qc7 3. Bc3 Bd4 4.
>					Qb2 Nb6 5. Rad1 Bxc3 6. Qxc3
>1:10	4/10	0.14	6627204		1...Bg6 2. Nd2 Qc7 3. Bc3 Bd4 4.
>					Qb2 Nb6 5. Rad1 Qe7 6. Nf5 Bxf5
>					7. exf5 Bxc3 8. Qxc3
>4:05	5/11	0.11	24328715	1...Bg6 2. Nd2 Qc7 3. Qd1 Bd4 4.
>					c3 Ba7 5. b4 Nb6 6. Qe2 Qd6 7.
>					Nec4 Nxc4 8. Nxc4
>14:02	6/12	0.03	88355386	1...Bg6 2. Nd2 Qc7 3. Bc3 Bd4 4.
>					Qb2 Nc5 5. Nf5 Bxf5 6. exf5 Qd7
>					7. b4 Bxc3 8. Qxc3 Qxd2 9. Qxc5

>I suspect that more interesting would be the analysis of these:
>
[D]3rr1k1/1p1n1p2/1qp2n1p/p1b1p2b/4P1p1/PP2N1PP/1BP2PB1/R1Q1RNK1 w - -
position after g4?

DIEP sees this as advantage for white directly from the start:

00:00 0 0 56 (0) 1 0.622 h3xg4 Bh5xg4
00:00 0 0 75 (0) 1 0.654 Ne3-f5
00:00 0 0 1065 (0) 2 -2.149 Ne3-f5 Bc5xf2 Kg1-h2 Bf2xe1 Qc1xe1
++ h3-g4
00:00 0 0 1133 (0) 2 0.622 h3xg4 Bh5xg4
00:00 0 0 2459 (173) 3 1.325 h3xg4 Bc5xe3 Nf1xe3 Bh5xg4
00:00 0 0 6277 (363) 4 0.506 h3xg4 Bh5-g6 b3-b4 a5xb4 a3xb4 Bc5xb4
00:00 0 0 25704 (5654) 5 0.966 h3xg4 Bh5-g6 g4-g5 h6xg5 Ne3-c4
00:00 0 0 56414 (11138) 6 0.462 h3xg4 Nf6xg4 Ne3xg4 Bh5xg4 Nf1-e3 Nd7-f6
00:02 0 0 204394 (48885) 7 0.460 h3xg4 Nf6xg4 Ne3xg4 Bh5xg4 Nf1-e3 h6-h5 Ne3xg4
h5xg4
++ f1-d2
00:03 0 0 343021 (86294) 7 0.696 Nf1-d2 Qb6-a7 b3-b4 Bc5-f8 Ne3-f5 a5-a4 Nd2-c4

00:05 0 0 512604 (116944) 8 0.400 Nf1-d2 Qb6-a7 Nd2-c4 g4xh3 Bg2xh3 Kg8-f8 Bb2-c
3 b7-b6
++ h3-g4
00:07 0 0 730577 (186296) 8 0.548 h3xg4 Bh5-g6 b3-b4 a5xb4 a3xb4 Bc5xb4 Ne3-c4 Q
b6-c5 Qc1xh6 Qc5xc4
00:25 0 0 2731856 (750383) 9 0.294 h3xg4 Nf6xg4 Bg2-h3 Ng4xe3 Nf1xe3 Nd7-f6 Kg1-
g2 Bc5xe3 Qc1xe3 Qb6xe3 Re1xe3
++ f1-d2
00:33 0 0 3643383 (1015766) 9 0.506 Nf1-d2 Qb6-a7 Bb2-c3 a5-a4 b3xa4 Kg8-f8 h3-h
4 Bc5-d4 Qc1-b2 Qa7xa4 Bc3xd4 e5xd4 Qb2-b4 Qa4xb4 a3xb4
01:07 0 0 7402451 (2116658) 10 0.291 Nf1-d2 Qb6-a7 b3-b4 Bc5xe3 Re1xe3 g4xh3 Bg2
xh3 Kg8-f8 b4xa5 Nf6-g4
++ b2-c3
02:16 0 0 15253229 (3679456) 10 0.341 Bb2-c3 g4xh3 Bg2xh3 Bh5-f3 Nf1-d2 Nf6xe4 B
c3xa5 Qb6xa5 Nd2xf3 Kg8-f8 a3-a4
++ f1-h2
02:40 0 0 17870834 (4220380) 10 0.354 Nf1-h2 g4xh3 Bg2xh3 Bh5-g6 Bh3xd7 Nf6xd7 N
h2-g4 h6-h5 Ng4-h6 Kg8-f8 Nh6-f5 Nd7-f6
++ a3-a4
03:50 0 0 25753917 (6499422) 11 0.354 Nf1-h2 g4xh3 Bg2xh3 Bh5-g6 Bh3xd7 Nf6xd7 N
h2-g4 h6-h5 Ng4-h6 Kg8-f8 Nh6-f5 Nd7-f6
++ b2-c3
++ f1-d2
06:18 0 0 42810178 (7893075) 11 0.437 Nf1-d2 Qb6-a7 b3-b4 Bc5xe3 Re1xe3 g4xh3 Bg
2xh3 Nf6-g4 Bh3xg4 Bh5xg4 Nd2-c4 a5-a4
11:29 0 0 76993736 (11384648) 12 0.437 Nf1-d2 Qb6-a7 b3-b4 Bc5xe3 Re1xe3 g4xh3 B
g2xh3 a5-a4 Nd2-c4 Kg8-f8 Bh3xd7 Nf6-d5

[D]3rr1k1/1p1n1p2/1qp2nbp/p1b1p1p1/4P3/PP2N1PP/1BP2PB1/R1Q1RNK1 w - -
position after Bg6

Obviously the scores here are the same like the first output produced where
diep planned to play Bg6

>Which are the aftermaths of the two choices.  Often, when a computer will pound
>away for days on some position looking for an appropriate bm, it won't find it.
>But if you instead have it analyze the best choice, it will find it in 1/100th
>of the time.  Not sure why it works that way.



This page took 0.01 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.