Author: leonid
Date: 05:50:25 02/03/02
Go up one level in this thread
On February 03, 2002 at 07:02:33, Ralf Elvsén wrote: >On February 02, 2002 at 23:12:08, leonid wrote: > >> >>Probably you are right. The only sure advantage is that no missing mate will be >>ever lost in any game. >> >>Leonid. >> > >I must admit I was never interested in mate solving. But some days ago >I decided to try one of your positions with many pieces. My program >was stuck on ply 2 so I turned of the Q-search and a lot of other things >and returned 0 as evaluation if no mate was found. I still don't think >I was close to solve it in reasonable time (got to 8 or 9 plies >I think in 5 mins). There are obviously some things to learn when >it comes to solving these kind of positions, and maybe these >considerations can be of value in an ordinary positions. > >Well, so much to do, so little time... The same is true for me. It is already for some time that I see that Heiner mate solver do better in specialized plys that mine but never can find needed time to start my writing. I hope that this week will make the difference. Presumably I will stay at home and it could help. You can all the time look into Heiner mate solver that give all his explanation with its code. His brute force search with hash make all initial 4 moves search possible in every position in around 0.05 sec. Once you have quick brute force search, making efficent selective is very simple. Brute force is base for everything. Leonid. >Ralf
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.