Author: Uri Blass
Date: 07:00:53 05/06/02
Go up one level in this thread
On May 06, 2002 at 09:56:26, Russell Reagan wrote: >On May 06, 2002 at 01:16:41, Uri Blass wrote: > >>On May 06, 2002 at 00:41:48, Russell Reagan wrote: >> >>>On May 05, 2002 at 06:54:48, Uri Blass wrote: >>> >>>>I think that there are only 32 squares and 4 kind of pieces and it means that >>>>5^32 is an upper bound for the number of position(a square may be empty) >>>> >>>>5^32 is only an upper bound and the number of practical positions to analyze may >>>>be clearly smaller. >>> >>> >>>443,748,401,247 is the number of positions in the 8-piece (or fewer) endgame >>>tablebases for draughts. >>> >>>That number is extremely close to 441,739,287,424, which is the number of >>>possible positions with 8 pieces on the board (32*31*30*29*28*27*26*25) >> >> >>It is not the number of possible positions with 8 pieces on the board. >> >>choosing 8 different squares in the board can be done in >> >>32*31*30*29*28*27*25*25/(8*7*6*5*4*3*2) >> >>After that you need to put in every square a number (1-4) to tell the computer >>the kind of piece that is there so you need to multiply that number by 4^8. >> >>4^8=65536>8*7*6*5*4*3*2=40320 so the number is slightly bigger but your formula >>gives bigger numbers for tablebases of more than 8 pieces. >> >> >>Uri > >I took that original number straight off the Chinook website, so it is an exact >value of the number of positions with 8 or fewer pieces. > >Russell The small difference is probably because of luck because you did in your calculation 2 mitakes(one mistake that make the number bigger and another mistake that make it smaller). 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.