Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: good time usage of programs

Author: Robert Hyatt

Date: 14:04:27 06/03/98

Go up one level in this thread


On June 03, 1998 at 06:28:41, Alessandro Damiani wrote:

>On June 02, 1998 at 06:49:16, Inmann Werner wrote:
>
>>Hello!
>>
>>Making programs faster is making them playing better.(?!)
>>OK
>>But in a match, if there is a time limit, it is important, that the
>>program thinks long at the right time, and not, when everything is
>>clear.
>>But to implement that is more then difficult. When is a move "clear"?
>>Maybe deeper, there is a fine combination. When should the program
>>take time to look deeper?
>>
>>any suggestion, which are common?
>
>Hi Werner!
>
>One idea I had some days ago was to use the definition of singularity at
>the root to decide whether to start the next iteration or not:
>
>If the best move is at least S better than all other moves, then stop
>the search. Since we know the score of the best move, the cost is
>testing the siblings with a null-window.
>
>So, when one move is obviously better than the others, the program will
>stop and play that move. Seems ok to me. But: is the cost worth it or
>not? I think not, but perhaps I am wrong?
>
>Ciao
>
>Alessandro

this will make you look like a genius at times, and a fool at other
times.

Here is a sample position:

5r1k/6p/1n2Q2p/4p//7P/PP4PK/R1B1q/ w

This is from the game Cray Blitz vs Belle, at the 1981 ACM event.  This
has
shown up in more than one "test suite" position.  At this tournament, we
were running in a "batch processing backup system" with no thinking on
the
opponent's time or anything. I had to submit a batch job, and then keep
checking to see when it finished.  We were using about 30-45 seconds per
move because the machine was not dedicated (this was a backup machine as
our primary machine had died).

Here's the gist:  at short searches, Qxb6 seems to win material.  If you
notice this and use your idea to notice that this move is way better
than
any other move at the root, you can quit the search early and make a
really
silly mistake, because you can win a piece, but get killed in the
process.

In this game, Cray Blitz actually played Qxb6 and lost.  Crafty finds
that
Qb6 is bad and finds the forced draw (Bxh6) in just a few seconds.  But
if
it quit because it thought that Qxb6 was far better than all the other
moves (root singular) it would be "surprised..."



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.