Author: Uri Blass
Date: 06:27:20 01/28/02
Go up one level in this thread
On January 28, 2002 at 08:15:04, Ed Schröder wrote: >On January 28, 2002 at 07:42:39, Amir Ban wrote: > >>On January 28, 2002 at 07:33:59, Albert Silver wrote: >> >>>On January 28, 2002 at 07:29:03, Uri Blass wrote: >>> >>>>On January 28, 2002 at 07:11:05, Albert Silver wrote: >>>> >>>>>On January 28, 2002 at 06:58:25, Uri Blass wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>On January 28, 2002 at 06:42:25, Albert Silver wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>On January 28, 2002 at 06:33:26, Amir Ban wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>On January 28, 2002 at 06:12:53, Ed Schröder wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>Will TACTIC's eventually REFUTE! Positional play? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>In the end yes. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>It is my (new) opinion that the nature of chess is just search. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>Elo progress of (professional) chess programs... >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>1990 - elo 2000 (average depth 6-8) (TC 40/2h) >>>>>>>>>1995 - elo 2300 (average depth 8-10) >>>>>>>>>2000 - elo 2500 (average depth 11-13) >>>>>>>>>2002 - elo 2600 (average depth 12-14) >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>This begs the question, because the programs are newer and play positionally >>>>>>>>different. Will a 1990/1995 program perform 2600+ on today's hardware ? >>>>>>>>Doubtful. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>No way to stop it. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>No suprise Kasparov lost against Deep Blue. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>It was a surprise because he is clearly better. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>The sad future: it will be in the headlines when a grandmaster occasionally will >>>>>>>>>win from a computer. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>If this will happen due to positionally outplaying will you also consider it sad >>>>>>>>? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>Amir >>>>>>> >>>>>>>I don't think he meant it would be sad they won, but that this would be >>>>>>>considered news. In any case, I'm afraid I agree with him on the nature of >>>>>>>chess. I think that positional play is just extremely deep and refined tactical >>>>>>>play. Since we approach them differently, we regard them as different, but that >>>>>>>is still how I regard them. Notice how already some elements of knowledge that >>>>>>>were necessary in older programs are removed as the search makes up for it. >>>>>> >>>>>>I do not believe in it. >>>>>> >>>>>>If it is the case palm tiger should have knowledge that the default tiger does >>>>>>not have but it is not the case because I remember from christophe's posts that >>>>>>palm tiger is the same engine that he is using for tournaments except more hash >>>>>>tables book and better hardware. >>>>>> >>>>>>Palm tiger is better than the old programs on similiar hardware and it means >>>>>>that exactly the same knowledge that is good for today programs can be also good >>>>>>for old programs. >>>>>> >>>>>>Uri >>>>> >>>>>I was speaking about the reverse: knowledge that was necessary or useful in >>>>>older programs with much more limited hardware but that is not necessary or >>>>>useful today. >>>>> >>> >>>>I understood and my point is that knowledge that was used in palm tiger is also >>>>necessary for tiger on good hardware and palm tiger is the best for it's >>>>hardware. >>>> >>>>Uri >>> >>>There used to be knowledge that was deliberately inserted to avoid things such >>>as giving a piece to play a fork and capture the rook on a1/a8. This was useful >>>because they always played this (the Mephisto MMIV did IIRC) and lost the second >>>piece (the knight) a bit after. Today this horizon effect is compensated by the >>>depth of the search. This is just an example, and I'm sure the programmers could >>>say more about this. >> >>A white knight on a8/h8 is weak and often in trouble, and there's nothing wrong >>with factoring that in the evaluation function. The fact that search will often >>find this on its own is immaterial. > >There is nothing wrong having this kind of knowledge in your eval. The BIG >question is: IS IT NEEDED as search can do that job for you too? If a deep >search depth guarantees you to deal with the Na8/Nh8 cases why do you want to do >things twice and spoil valuable processor time? > >Ed The fact that search can often help does not mean that search can always help and there are examples when search practically did not help. Here is one of them: Junior5(p200) lost against Fritz3(p90)in the ssdf games because of a wrong plan to capture the rook on h8. My impression based on analysis is that tiger has that knowledge when an old Rebel version(Century1 if I remember correctly) did not have the knowledge but did not fall into the trap because it was too weak in tactics to see the relevant line Here is the relevant position [D]rnbqkbnr/pp3ppp/2p5/8/2ppP3/2N2N2/PP3PPP/R1BQKB1R w KQkq - 0 6 I remember that some old Rebel did not see 6.Bxc4 but when I gave it the position after 6.Bxc4 dxc3 7.Qxd8+ Kxd8 it became happy and it convinced me that Rebel did not see it because the tactics was too deep for it(it probably pruned the line 6.Bxc4 dxc3 7.Qxd8+ Kxd8 for the reason that losing material and trading queens after losing material does not seem to be a good idea). Junior5 showed that it is relatively strong in tactics by the blunder 6.Bxc4(most programs need more time to find the blunder) It simply believed that 6.Bxc4 dxc3 7.Qxd8+ Kxd8 8.Ne5 Be6 9.Bxe6 fxe6 10.Nf7+ wins material. seeing it is not easy for other chess programs For comparison yace and Deep Fritz's analysis on p800(yace failed high on Bxc4 and could not solve the fail high problem even after 10 minutes) It is clear that Junior5 is faster than yace and seems to be only slightly slower than Deep Fritz. note that Junior7 is the fastest in finding Bxc4 and it finds it for a different wrong reason (Bxf7+) Junior 5.0 - Fritz 3.0 P90 rnbqkbnr/pp3ppp/2p5/8/2ppP3/2N2N2/PP3PPP/R1BQKB1R w KQkq - 0 1 Analysis by Yace 0.99.56(64 mbytes hash): 6.Nxd4 = (-0.12) Depth: 1 00:00:00 6.Nxd4 Bg4 7.Qxg4 Qxd4 ³ (-0.34) Depth: 2 00:00:00 6.Qxd4 Bf5 ³ (-0.32) Depth: 2 00:00:00 6.Qxd4 Qxd4 = (-0.14) Depth: 2 00:00:00 6.Qxd4 Qxd4 7.Nxd4 Bc5 ³ (-0.32) Depth: 3 00:00:00 6.Nxd4 c5 7.Nc2 Qxd1+ 8.Nxd1 ³ (-0.30) Depth: 3 00:00:00 6.Nxd4 c5 7.Nf3 Qxd1+ 8.Nxd1 = (-0.24) Depth: 3 00:00:00 6.Nxd4 Bc5 7.Be3 Nf6 8.Bxc4 ³ (-0.31) Depth: 4 00:00:00 6.Qxd4 Be6 ³ (-0.30) Depth: 4 00:00:00 6.Qxd4 Qxd4 7.Nxd4 c5 8.Nf3 = (-0.19) Depth: 4 00:00:00 6.Qxd4 Qxd4 7.Nxd4 c5 8.Nf3 Be6 ³ (-0.29) Depth: 5 00:00:00 15kN 6.Nxd4 Nf6 7.Bxc4 c5 ³ (-0.28) Depth: 5 00:00:00 15kN 6.Nxd4 b5 7.Be2 b4 8.Na4 = (-0.18) Depth: 5 00:00:00 15kN 6.Nxd4 b5 7.Bf4 Qf6 8.Bc7 Bb4 ³ (-0.35) Depth: 6 00:00:00 95kN 6.Qxd4 Qxd4 7.Nxd4 Bb4 8.Bxc4 Ke7 ³ (-0.34) Depth: 6 00:00:00 95kN 6.Qxd4 Qxd4 7.Nxd4 b5 8.Be2 b4 9.Nd1 = (-0.12) Depth: 6 00:00:00 95kN 6.Qxd4 Qxd4 7.Nxd4 b5 8.Bf4 b4 9.Na4 c5 = (-0.23) Depth: 7 00:00:00 209kN 6.Qxd4 Qxd4 7.Nxd4 b5 8.Be2 b4 9.Nd1 c5 10.Nb5 = (-0.18) Depth: 8 00:00:01 664kN 6.Qxd4 Qxd4 7.Nxd4 b5 8.Be3 Nf6 9.0-0-0 Ng4 10.Nc2 Nxe3 ³ (-0.29) Depth: 9 00:00:05 1808kN 6.Qxd4 Qxd4 7.Nxd4 b5 8.Bf4 Nf6 9.Bxb8 Rxb8 10.Nxc6 Rb7 11.Rd1 Bg4 = (0.04) Depth: 10 00:00:22 6995kN 6.Qxd4 Qxd4 7.Nxd4 b5 8.a3 Bc5 9.Be3 Nd7 10.Rd1 Ne7 11.Nc2 Kf8 = (-0.12) Depth: 11 00:00:53 16711kN 6.Nxd4 b5 7.Be2 b4 8.Na4 c5 9.Nb5 Qxd1+ 10.Kxd1 Bg4 11.Bxg4 Nf6 = (-0.11) Depth: 11 00:02:01 35595kN 6.Nxd4 b5 7.Be2 Bd6 8.Nf3 Ne7 9.e5 Bc7 10.Qxd8+ Bxd8 11.0-0 0-0 12.Bf4 = (-0.11) Depth: 11 00:02:18 40214kN 6.Bxc4 dxc3 7.Qxd8+ Kxd8 8.Ne5 Ke8 9.Nxf7 cxb2 10.Bxb2 Bb4+ 11.Kf1 Ke7 12.Nxh8 Ba3 13.Bxa3+ c5 = (-0.10) Depth: 11 00:04:32 80887kN (Blass, Tel-aviv 28.01.2002) Junior 5.0 - Fritz 3.0 P90(64 mbytes hash) rnbqkbnr/pp3ppp/2p5/8/2ppP3/2N2N2/PP3PPP/R1BQKB1R w KQkq - 0 1 Analysis by Deep Fritz: 6.Bxc4-- -+ (-2.09) Depth: 1/6 00:00:00 6.Bxc4-- -+ (-2.09) Depth: 1/6 00:00:00 6.Nxd4! ³ (-0.59) Depth: 1/6 00:00:00 6.Nxd4! ³ (-0.44) Depth: 1/6 00:00:00 6.Nxd4 Bc5 ³ (-0.62) Depth: 2/7 00:00:00 6.Qxd4! ³ (-0.59) Depth: 2/7 00:00:00 6.Qxd4! Qxd4 ³ (-0.44) Depth: 2/7 00:00:00 6.Qxd4 Qxd4 7.Nxd4 Bc5 ³ (-0.62) Depth: 3/8 00:00:00 6.Nxd4! ³ (-0.59) Depth: 3/11 00:00:00 6.Nxd4! Bc5 ³ (-0.44) Depth: 3/11 00:00:00 1kN 6.Nxd4 c5 7.Nf3 Qxd1+ 8.Nxd1 ³ (-0.47) Depth: 4/15 00:00:00 2kN 6.Qxd4! ³ (-0.44) Depth: 4/15 00:00:00 3kN 6.Qxd4 Qxd4 7.Nxd4 Bc5 8.Be3 b5 ³ (-0.37) Depth: 5/17 00:00:00 7kN 6.Nxd4! ³ (-0.34) Depth: 5/17 00:00:00 12kN 6.Nxd4! b5 7.Be3 Bd6 ³ (-0.28) Depth: 5/20 00:00:00 17kN 6.Nxd4 b5 7.Be3 Bd6 8.a4 a6 ³ (-0.37) Depth: 6/21 00:00:00 29kN 6.Qxd4! ³ (-0.34) Depth: 6/21 00:00:00 33kN 6.Qxd4! Qxd4 7.Nxd4 b5 8.Be3 Bb4 9.Rd1 = (-0.19) Depth: 6/21 00:00:00 38kN 6.Qxd4 Qxd4 7.Nxd4 b5 8.Be3 Bb4 9.Rd1 Nf6 ³ (-0.34) Depth: 7/18 00:00:00 55kN 6.Nxd4! ³ (-0.31) Depth: 7/27 00:00:00 137kN 6.Nxd4 b5 7.Be2 b4 8.Na4 c5 9.Nf3 Qxd1+ 10.Bxd1 ³ (-0.44) Depth: 8/24 00:00:00 258kN 6.Qxd4! ³ (-0.41) Depth: 8/24 00:00:00 271kN 6.Qxd4! Qxd4 7.Nxd4 b5 8.Bf4 b4 9.Na4 Nf6 10.Rd1 Nxe4 = (-0.25) Depth: 8/24 00:00:00 298kN 6.Qxd4 Qxd4 7.Nxd4 b5 8.Bf4 b4 9.Na4 Nf6 10.Bxb8 Rxb8 11.Bxc4 Nxe4 ³ (-0.31) Depth: 9/26 00:00:00 429kN 6.Qxd4 Qxd4 7.Nxd4 b5 8.Bf4 Bc5 9.Rd1 Nf6 10.Be5 Bg4 11.Be2 ³ (-0.28) Depth: 10/25 00:00:01 1068kN 6.Qxd4 Qxd4 7.Nxd4 b5 8.Bf4 Bc5 9.Rd1 Ne7 10.Be2 0-0 11.0-0 Rd8 = (-0.25) Depth: 11/28 00:00:05 2925kN 6.Qxd4 Qxd4 7.Nxd4 b5 8.Bf4 Bc5 9.Rd1 Ne7 10.Be2 Ng6 11.Be3 b4 = (-0.22) Depth: 12/33 00:00:13 8067kN 6.Bxc4! = (-0.19) Depth: 12/40 00:01:07 40924kN 6.Bxc4 Bc5 7.Ne5 Qf6 8.Nxf7 dxc3 9.0-0 Qd4 10.Qxd4 Bxd4 = (0.00) Depth: 13/44 00:07:28 270996kN (Blass, Tel-aviv 28.01.2002) Junior 5.0 - Blass,U rnbqkbnr/pp3ppp/2p5/8/2ppP3/2N2N2/PP3PPP/R1BQKB1R w KQkq - 0 1 Analysis by Junior 5.0(25 hours/40 moves): 6.Qxd4 Qxd4 7.Nxd4 Bc5 ³ (-0.40) Depth: 3 00:00:00 2kN 6.Qxd4 Qxd4 7.Nxd4 b5 8.Be2 = (-0.14) Depth: 6 00:00:00 10kN 6.Qxd4 Qxd4 7.Nxd4 b5 8.Be2 = (-0.14) Depth: 6 00:00:00 29kN 6.Qxd4 Qxd4 7.Nxd4 b5 8.Be3 b4 9.Na4 Nf6 10.Bxc4 ³ (-0.39) Depth: 9 00:00:00 138kN 6.Nxd4 b5 7.Bf4 Qf6 8.Be3 Bd6 9.Be2 ³ (-0.38) Depth: 9 00:00:01 425kN 6.Nxd4 b5 7.Bf4 Qf6 8.Be3 Bd6 9.Be2 ³ (-0.38) Depth: 9 00:00:01 750kN 6.Nxd4 b5 7.Bf4 Bc5 8.Be3 Qe7 9.Be2 Nf6 ³ (-0.56) Depth: 12 00:00:10 6617kN 6.Qxd4 Qxd4 7.Nxd4 b5 8.Bf4 Ne7 9.0-0-0 Nd7 = (-0.19) Depth: 12 00:00:11 7673kN 6.Qxd4 Qxd4 7.Nxd4 b5 8.Bf4 Ne7 9.0-0-0 Nd7 = (-0.19) Depth: 12 00:00:15 9697kN 6.Qxd4 Qxd4 7.Nxd4 b5 8.Bf4 Bc5 9.0-0-0 Ne7 10.Be2 Nd7 ³ (-0.26) Depth: 13 00:00:18 11654kN 6.Bxc4 = (0.11) Depth: 13 00:01:17 52808kN 6.Bxc4 a5 7.Qxd4 Qxd4 8.Nxd4 b5 9.Bb3 a4 10.Bd1 Bd6 11.Bg5 Ne7 ² (0.41) Depth: 13 00:02:32 106519kN 6.Bxc4 a5 7.Qxd4 Qxd4 8.Nxd4 b5 9.Bb3 a4 10.Bd1 Bd6 11.Bg5 Ne7 ² (0.41) Depth: 13 00:02:32 106708kN (Blass, Tel-aviv 28.01.2002) Junior 7 - Blass,U rnbqkbnr/pp3ppp/2p5/8/2ppP3/2N2N2/PP3PPP/R1BQKB1R w KQkq - 0 1 Analysis by Junior 7: 6.Nxd4 c5 7.Nf5 Qxd1+ 8.Kxd1 = (-0.04) Depth: 3 00:00:00 1kN 6.Qxd4 Qxd4 7.Nxd4 Bc5 = (0.14) Depth: 3 00:00:00 2kN 6.Qxd4 Qxd4 7.Nxd4 Bc5 8.Be3 b5 = (0.06) Depth: 6 00:00:00 10kN 6.Qxd4 Qxd4 7.Nxd4 Bc5 8.Be3 b5 9.Rd1 = (0.03) Depth: 9 00:00:00 139kN 6.Nxd4 b5 7.Be3 Nf6 8.Be2 Bd6 = (0.07) Depth: 9 00:00:00 371kN 6.Nxd4 b5 7.Bf4 Qf6 8.Qd2 b4 9.Nce2 c5 10.e5 Qg6 11.Nf3 Qe4 = (0.09) Depth: 12 00:00:07 4885kN 6.Bxc4! ² (0.37) Depth: 12 00:00:29 19451kN 6.Bxc4! dxc3 7.Bxf7+ Ke7 8.Qb3 Nf6 9.e5 c2 10.0-0 h6 11.exf6+ Kxf6 12.Re1 ² (0.48) Depth: 12 00:00:48 32687kN 6.Bxc4 dxc3 7.Bxf7+ Ke7 8.Qb3 Nf6 9.bxc3 Nxe4 10.0-0 Kf6 11.Re1 Qd3 12.Bf4 Nxc3 ² (0.30) Depth: 14 00:02:39 104857kN (Blass, Tel-aviv 28.01.2002) 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.