Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Which set of TBS is most recommendable?

Author: James T. Walker

Date: 09:18:45 12/02/01

Go up one level in this thread


On December 02, 2001 at 12:10:07, Aaron Tay wrote:

>On December 02, 2001 at 10:04:39, James T. Walker wrote:
>
>>On December 01, 2001 at 21:57:05, Mike S. wrote:
>>
>>>On December 01, 2001 at 20:10:09, James T. Walker wrote:
>>>
>>>>On December 01, 2001 at 18:47:10, Russell Reagan wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On December 01, 2001 at 16:35:31, Mike S. wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>(...)
>>>>>>I'm aware most people will say "use all 5 men tbs", but large experiments have
>>>>>>been made showing that the slowdown effect and other effects from using the tbs,
>>>>>>often result in *worse* performances in practical positions, than without the
>>>>>>tbs. Misjudgement of continuations which keep the game out of tbs material, is
>>>>>>one of these effects, which i.e. can make the win unecessarily easy for the
>>>>>>opponent (which may - without tbs - fail to win if the best defense in played).
>>>>>>(...)
>>>
>>>>>(...) I don't see how this
>>>>>slows down anything, unless you're talking about incorporating probing the
>>>>>tablebases into your search and evaluation of many positions.  I hope someone
>>>>>will explain this to me, because I've never implemented tablebases into my own
>>>>>program and I plan to eventually, so I'm sure this will be something I'll need
>>>>>to know eventually.
>>>
>>>Yes, I meant using them in the search (much) before a tbs situation is actually
>>>reached in the game.
>>>
>>>Btw. in conjunction to that, I mentioned in earlier discussions M-Chess Pro's
>>>ability to configure *two types* of endgame table directories: One which is
>>>accessed during the search, and another one which is only accessed when the
>>>endgame material is on the board already. M-Chess didn't use the Nalimovs yet,
>>>but I think because of the doubts expressed in my 1st posting, it would make
>>>sense now too. Because now if I leave most 5 piece tbs away, they are always
>>>left away... I don't recall any replies though - people are either not
>>>interested in too much detail regarding the tbs, or underestimate the possible
>>>downside when using everything "as is".
>>>
>>>>Most all programs are probing the tablebases at the leafs.  This slows some down
>>>>to about half the normal K/nps.  Some like Shredder slow down to 10% of normal
>>>>(In some positions) but the ply depth is greater because of the information
>>>>obtained from the tablebases.
>>>>By the way, I had a position today where one program with tablebases had one
>>>>queen and announced mate on itself.  The other program had two queens but
>>>>without tablebases only managed a draw.
>>>
>>>This is a drastic example. If resigning was on, the program with the single
>>>queen has wasted half a point... but that doesn't mean here, it played moves
>>>worse than without tablebases.
>>>
>>>From the experiment I mentioned, this was the position (NET#10) with the most
>>>unexpected results. Seven different programs played the position twice against
>>>themselves, but only one side each used the 5 piece tbs. With one exception,
>>>White *with* the tablebases lost always while *without* the tbs, White could
>>>most always draw.
>>>
>>>[D]3R4/1p6/2b5/2P1k2p/p3p2P/P6r/1P2KB2/8 b - - 0 1
>>>"No TBS" vs. "TBS":  9.5 - 4.5
>>>
>>>So, what (sub-)set of the tablebases is most recommendable?
>>>
>>>I'm sure programmers will have an opinion built on their own comprehensive
>>>testing.
>>>
>>>Furthermore, what do you thing about the configuration idea M-Chess Pro did use
>>>(differents directories for dynamic/static access)? Is there any other program,
>>>or GUI, which uses this idea?
>>>
>>>Regards,
>>>M.Scheidl
>>
>>Hello Mike,
>>I'm interested in your experiment.  What time control did you use for this test.
>
>I'm very curious as well. Why do you think the side with the tablebase lost? Due
>to time wasted probing useless positions? Or did the side with tablebases resign
>to early, or avoided converting to a  "loss" endgame in theory, but play a even
>weaker and even easier to win position?
>
>Your starting position is very far away from 5 men set, how many tb hits are you
>getting? Do the moves vary a lot between the side with tbs and those without?
>
>
>
>>Jim

I just ran this position with Chess Tiger 14.0 & Shredder 5.  Both programs draw
with tablebases.  I find it hard to believe that any of the top programs will
lose this ending with tablebases.  The opposite colored bishops make this
position a likely draw.
Jim



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.