Author: Ricardo Gibert
Date: 07:13:38 04/20/02
Go up one level in this thread
On April 20, 2002 at 09:49:55, Gian-Carlo Pascutto wrote: >On April 20, 2002 at 09:38:05, Ed Schröder wrote: > >>4 mate positions I think Rebel is good, if not superior :-) >> >>You are invited to disproof.... > >Nothing more fun than ruining the dreams of a competitor ;) > >>[d]5n2/B3K3/2p2Np1/4k3/7P/3bN1P1/2Prn1P1/1q6 w - - 0 1 id Mate in 30; >> >>Well known, I think. >> >>Rebel: 0.1 second > >0.03 seconds > >Sjeng: prove > >Max time to search (s): 10000 > >P: 0 D: 2000000000 N: 10005 S: 10004 Mem: 0.27M Iters: 286 MaxDepth: 64 >Time : 0.030000 >This position is WON. >PV: e3g4 e5f5 g4h6 f5e5 h6f7 e5f5 f7d6 f5e5 f6g4 e5d5 g4e3 d5e5 d6f7 e5e4 f7g5 >e4e5 g5f3 e5e4 f3d2 e4e5 d2f3 e5e4 f3g5 e4e5 g5f7 e5e4 f7d6 e4e5 e3g4 e5d5 g4f6 >d5e5 d6f7 e5f5 f7h6 f5e5 h6g4 e5f5 g4e3 f5e5 f6g4 e5e4 g4f2 e4e5 f2d3 e5e4 d3f2 >e4e5 f2g4 e5e4 g4f6 e4e5 e3c4 e5f5 c4d6 f5e5 f6g4 e5d5 c2c4 > > >>[d]1b4k1/r4p2/5Pp1/7p/6p1/8/8/2Q4K w - - 0 1 id Mate in 15; >> >>Rebel: 2.4 seconds. >> >>Maybe there is a shorter mate. > >5.8 seconds > >Sjeng: prove > >Max time to search (s): 30 > >P: 0 D: 2000000000 N: 1879698 S: 1879697 Mem: 50.19M Iters: 139957 MaxDepth: 41 >Time : 5.830000 >This position is WON. >PV: c1h6 g4g3 h6g (yes, its borked, the first move is always correct though) > > >>[d]8/8/8/8/8/8/ppQKPPP1/k7 w - - 0 1 id Mate in 12; >> >>Rebel 4.6 seconds. > >0 seconds flat > >Sjeng: prove > >Max time to search (s): 100 > >P: 0 D: 2000000000 N: 601 S: 600 Mem: 0.02M Iters: 36 MaxDepth: 23 >Time : 0.000000 >This position is WON. >PV: c2c3 a1b1 c3d3 b1a1 d3d4 a1b1 d4e4 b1a1 e4e5 a1b1 e5f5 b1a1 f5f6 a1b1 f6g6 >b1a1 g6g7 a1b1 g7h7 b1a1 h7h8 a1b1 h8h1 > >>[d]3b4/p3P1q1/P1n2pr1/4p3/2B1n1Pk/1P1R4/P1p3KN/1N6 w - - 0 1 id Mate in 15; >> >>Rebel 3.6 seconds. > >0.02 seconds > >Sjeng: prove > >Max time to search (s): 10 > >P: 0 D: 2000000000 N: 6011 S: 6010 Mem: 0.16M Iters: 154 MaxDepth: 29 >Time : 0.020000 >This position is WON. >PV: d3h3 h4g5 h3h5 g5f4 h5f5 f4e3 f5f3 e3d4 f3d3 d4c5 d3d5 c5b6 d5b5 b6a6 b5b8 >a6a5 b3b4 a5a4 c4b3 > >Well, that's three to one Ed. You lose. Can you answer my mail now ? :) > >-- >GCP I would say this all very impressive, except I don't know what hardware each of you ran this on. For instance, wouldn't you be disappointed by your programs realative performance if Ed announced that his programs used an antique 4.77mhz PC? ;-)
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.