Author: Uri Blass
Date: 00:26:15 12/04/01
Go up one level in this thread
On December 03, 2001 at 18:06:00, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On December 03, 2001 at 14:54:32, Uri Blass wrote: > >>On December 03, 2001 at 10:31:45, Robert Hyatt wrote: >> >>>On December 03, 2001 at 07:39:53, Uri Blass wrote: >>> >>>>Here is some analysis(I also post previous analysis before Qe3 when it could not >>>>see the draw even after finishing iteration 18): >>> >>>The question is this: Does it see where black can _force_ the draw? (I >>>seriously doubt it as it is 60 plies deep) or does it see a position where >>>it thinks white is worse and would therefore agree to a draw, when white is >>>really not worse? IE I wouldn't trust a "material-only" score under any >>>circumstances, since so many scores are 0.00 when in fact one side is winning >>>easily. >> >>I gave it to analyze for more time and it does not keep the 0.00 score but the >>score is still better than the alternative and is only 1 pawn for white but it >>is still better than 2 pawns for white that is the result of the alternative >> > > >However that isn't convincing. Material-only might arrive at a position with >white having pawns on e7 and d7. And conclude that black is better. Because >the positional score for those two pawns is missing... I do not think that position with pawns at d7 and e7 or other positions with positional score of more than 2 pawns are relevant in this case. programs cannot see 0.00 without only material evaluation because there are lines without repetition when they have a small positional score I believe that it is a draw but I am not 100% sure about it. The point is that the evaluation of programs that is good in tactics before Ra6 Qe3 should be close to 0.00 and not close to +2. I tried again yace(only material) and this time without previous learning nad it can see the 0.00 after Qe3 for at least 2 plies in a row. It is interesting to see that h5 is not the only alternative for black and yace suggests the line Qd7 Re8 h4 Qxe4 Ra7+ Kg8 Qd7 Re7 that is also leading to a draw. Here is the analysis: [D]1r6/5kp1/R1Qb1p1p/1p1PpP2/1Pp1B3/2P1q2P/6P1/5K2 w - - 0 1 Analysis by Yace 0.99.56: 46.Qxd6 +- (3.50) Depth: 1 00:00:19 46.Qxd6 Rf8 +- (3.50) Depth: 2 00:00:20 46.Qxd6 Qf4+ 47.Bf3 Rf8 +- (3.50) Depth: 3 00:00:23 46.Qxd6 Re8 47.Bf3 Qxc3 +- (2.70) Depth: 4 00:00:29 46.Qxd6 Re8 47.Bf3 Qc1+ 48.Kf2 Qxc3 +- (2.70) Depth: 5 00:00:50 23kN 46.Qxd6 Re8 47.Bf3 Qc1+ 48.Kf2 Qc2+ 49.Kg1 Qxf5 +- (2.70) Depth: 6 00:01:28 71kN 46.Qxd6 Re8 47.Bf3 Qc1+ 48.Kf2 Qc2+ 49.Kg1 Qxf5 50.Kh2 Re7 +- (2.70) Depth: 7 00:01:43 166kN 46.Qxd6 Re8 47.Bf3 Qc1+ 48.Kf2 Qc2+ 49.Kg1 Qxf5 50.Be2 Re7 51.Kh2 +- (2.70) Depth: 8 00:01:44 778kN 46.Qxd6 Re8 47.Bf3 Qc1+ 48.Kf2 Qd2+ 49.Be2 Qf4+ 50.Kg1 Qe3+ 51.Kh2 Qf4+ 52.Kh1 Qc1+ 53.Bf1 Qxf1+ 54.Kh2 +- (2.30) Depth: 9 00:01:46 1813kN 46.Qxd6 Re8 47.Bf3 Qc1+ 48.Kf2 Qd2+ 49.Be2 Qf4+ 50.Ke1 Qc1+ 51.Bd1 Qxc3+ 52.Kf1 Qd3+ 53.Be2 Qxf5+ 54.Kg1 Re7 55.Kh2 +- (1.90) Depth: 9 00:01:48 2358kN 46.Qd7+ Kg8 47.Qxd6 Rf8 48.Qe6+ Kh7 49.Qe7 Kg8 50.Bf3 Rf7 +- (1.91) Depth: 9 00:01:54 4867kN 46.Qd7+ Kg8 47.Qxd6 Rf8 48.Qe6+ Kh7 49.Qe7 Rg8 50.Bf3 Qc1+ 51.Kf2 Qc2+ 52.Kg1 Qxf5 +- (2.70) Depth: 9 00:01:55 5611kN 46.Qd7+ Kg8 47.Qxd6 Rf8 48.Qe6+ Kh7 49.Qe7 Rg8 50.Bf3 Qc1+ 51.Kf2 Qc2+ 52.Kg3 Qxf5 53.d6 +- (2.70) Depth: 10 00:02:00 7591kN 46.Qd7+ Kg8 47.Qxd6 Rf8 48.Qe6+ Kh7 49.Bf3 Rg8 50.Qf7 Qc1+ 51.Kf2 Qc2+ 52.Be2 Qxf5+ 53.Kg1 Kh8 +- (2.70) Depth: 11 00:02:15 15914kN 46.Qd7+ Kg8 47.Qxd6 Rf8 48.Qe6+ Kh7 49.Bf3 Rg8 50.Qb6 Qc1+ 51.Kf2 Qd2+ 52.Kg1 Qxc3 53.Ra7 Qxb4 54.Qxf6 +- (2.70) Depth: 12 00:02:59 38475kN 46.Qd7+ Kg8 47.Qxd6 Rf8 48.Qe6+ Kh7 49.Bf3 Rg8 50.Qb6 Qc1+ 51.Kf2 Qd2+ 52.Kg1 Qc1+ 53.Kh2 e4 54.Bh5 Qf4+ 55.g3 Qxf5 +- (2.70) Depth: 13 00:04:59 100454kN 46.Qd7+ Kg8 47.Qxd6 Rf8 48.Qe6+ Kh7 49.Bf3 Qxc3 50.Qe7 Qc1+ 51.Kf2 Qd2+ 52.Kg1 Qc1+ 53.Kh2 Qf4+ 54.Kh1 Qc1+ 55.Bd1 Qxd1+ 56.Kh2 Rg8 57.Rxf6 +- (2.30) Depth: 14 00:08:48 221907kN 46.Qd7+ Kg8 47.Qxd6 Rf8 48.Qe6+ Kh7 49.Bf3 Qc1+ 50.Kf2 Qd2+ 51.Kg1 Qc1+ 52.Kh2 Qf4+ 53.g3 Qxf3 54.d6 ± (1.30) Depth: 14 00:11:17 299829kN 46.Qd7+ Kg8 47.Qxd6 Rf8 48.Qe6+ Kh7 49.Bf3 Qc1+ 50.Kf2 Qd2+ 51.Kg1 Qc1+ 52.Kh2 Qf4+ 53.Kh1 Qc1+ 54.Bd1 Qxd1+ 55.Kh2 Rd8 56.d6 Kh8 57.Qe7 Rc8 58.g3 = (0.00) Depth: 14 00:14:10 389426kN 46.Qxd6 Re8 47.h4 Re7 48.Bf3 Qe4 = (0.01) Depth: 14 00:18:05 510779kN 46.Qxd6 Re8 47.h4 Re7 48.Bf3 Qc1+ 49.Kf2 Qd2+ 50.Kg3 Qe1+ 51.Kg4 h5+ 52.Kxh5 Qg3 53.Qe6+ Rxe6 54.dxe6+ Kg8 55.Ra8+ Kh7 56.Rh8+ Kxh8 57.e7 Qxf3+ 58.gxf3 g6+ +- (1.60) Depth: 14 00:20:15 576959kN 46.Qxd6 Re8 47.h4 h5 48.Bf3 Qc1+ 49.Kf2 Qd2+ 50.Be2 Qf4+ 51.Kg1 Qe3+ 52.Kh2 Qf4+ 53.Kh3 Qxf5+ 54.Kh2 Qf4+ 55.Kg1 Qe3+ 56.Kf1 Qc1+ 57.Kf2 Qf4+ 58.Ke1 Kg8 59.Qd7 Qxh4+ +- (1.90) Depth: 15 00:48:23 1429979kN 46.Qxd6 Re8 47.h4 Qxe4 48.Ra7+ Kg8 49.Qd7 Qd3+ 50.Kg1 Re7 51.Kh2 Rxd7 52.Rxd7 +- (1.50) Depth: 16 01:30:47 2730239kN 46.Qxd6 Re8 47.h4 Qxe4 48.Ra7+ Kg8 49.Qd7 Re7 50.Kg1 ² (0.50) Depth: 16 01:50:05 3319292kN 46.Qxd6 Re8 47.h4 Qxe4 48.Ra7+ Kg8 49.Qd7 Re7 50.Ra8+ Kh7 51.Qxb5 Qxf5+ 52.Kg1 Qb1+ 53.Kh2 Qe4 54.g3 Qc2+ 55.Kh3 Qxc3 56.Rc8 Rf7 = (0.00) Depth: 16 02:09:45 3922591kN 46.Qxd6 Re8 47.h4 Qxe4 48.Ra7+ Kg8 49.Qd7 Re7 50.Ra8+ Kh7 51.Qxe7 Qf4+ 52.Kg1 Qe3+ 53.Kh2 Qf4+ 54.g3 Qf2+ 55.Kh3 Qxf5+ 56.Kg2 Qc2+ 57.Kf1 Qd1+ 58.Kf2 Qd2+ 59.Kg1 = (0.00) Depth: 17 04:57:36 449631kN (Blass, Tel-aviv 04.12.2001) 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.