Author: Jeroen van Dorp
Date: 14:16:29 04/04/02
Go up one level in this thread
>>You are right, finding a forced mate from this "root position" needs a brute >>force search at some 24 or 26 ply, and that's way too much for engines these >>days to solve in a reasonable amount of time. > >This comment seems to indicate, that there really is a mate in 13. My comment didn't. Just to straigthen out matters. You're the boss on this :) , as I know zilch about programming. What I *do* know however is that most (normal) programs used as mate solver take an enormous time to find a forced mate, even in say 18 ply or more. I can remember after a day of searching the Mate 2.11 and earlier engines coming with the CB/Fritz GUI weren't even at ply 16 or 17. A nut cracker like CM8K might announce mate in 13, but I doubt if it's always a forced mate if it does the announcement. I assume(d) you have to do a bit of a brute force search to be sure to find a forced mate. Sometimes an engine announces mate, but can't uphold it's claim. It's that what I'm referring at. I don't know if it's a forced mate in 13 or 14 or so, but *if* it is then I assume there has to be a BF search for 26 or 28 ply, and that could take ages with todays stardard engines, given my experience with mate searching on (at least) my chess engines. So my remark really was: "if the original poster was referring to the fact that todays engines can't find a forced mate position here (given there is one) he is right." I however answered to the statement that "today's engines won't find the move Nxg6 in a reasonable time for the next 20 years". Your move :) J.
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.