Author: Robert Henry Durrett
Date: 11:11:03 06/21/02
Go up one level in this thread
On June 21, 2002 at 14:04:38, Robert Henry Durrett wrote: >On June 21, 2002 at 12:28:49, Christophe Theron wrote: > >>On June 21, 2002 at 06:53:41, Uri Blass wrote: >> >>>On June 21, 2002 at 04:57:44, Russell Reagan wrote: >>> >>>>On June 21, 2002 at 04:38:04, Uri Blass wrote: >>>> >>>>>How much time does your program need to see that it is a draw? >>>> >>>>At least a few more weeks :) >>>> >>>>Russell >>> >>>It is an easy draw for the following reasons; >>> >>> >>>1)White need always to move the knight by Nb3 N.. Nb3 N.. Nb3 N.. when the >>>knight is never captured(the knight is never captured in b3 and we need to prove >>>that the knight has a safe black square to go in order to prove that it is a >>>draw). >>> >>>2)The black king cannot control a1 so the black bishop needs to be in the long >>>diagnol in order to prevent a1 from the knight. >>> >>>3)The black bishop in the long diagnol can not control a5 so the black king >>>needs to control that square. >>> >>>4)3 means that the black king cannot control c1 and d2 so the black bishop needs >>>to control these squares but the black bishop must be in b2 in order to control >>>both a1 and c1 and it does not control d2 from that square. >>> >>>I believe that even programmers with rating of 1500 can find that it is a draw >>>and I wonder if one of them was smart enough to write the relevant code to >>>explain it to the computer. >>> >>>Uri >> >> >> >>The question is: will it make the program stronger? >> >>I can easily see how it can make a program weaker by slowing it down, and I >>seriously doubt it will increase the program's rating by a single elo point. >> >>Maybe if the programmer in question is smart enough he will decide to ignore >>this particular case. >> >> >> >> Christophe > >To me, the question is: How often does this type of situation occur in chess >games? If it is common, then maybe doing something about it might improve the >average performance of the engine [assumming not slow down engine excessively]. > >The position is representative of all positions in which the outcome would be a >draw [assuming no loss on the clock] with correct play by both sides. [This is >more general than positions where there is insufficient material to mate.] > >In the given position, either side can win if the other side fails to play >properly. But strong human players typically agree to a draw in such positions, >giving their opponent the benefit of a doubt. The key point to note here is >that this occurs ALL THE TIME in GM chess! It is extremely common. > >If coding were included in the engine which would, ***in effect***, allow the >engine "to come to the realization" [or "become aware"] [or "determine"] that >the game would likely end in a draw with reasonable play by the engine's >opponent, then additional coding might be turned on to look at the clock. If it >were then found that the engine's opponent was not in time trouble, then a third >mess of coding might initiate the offer of a draw. > >The remaining problem would be to minimize time consumed by the recurring part. > >One trick might be to have the program routinely search for suitable indicators >and do a closer look only if the indicators were present. An additional savings >in time might be obtained by limiting this to the endgame phase. > >Bob D. I forgot to mention the way that the rating of the program might be improved. If the engine were to "see" that there was no forced win for the engine, and "realize" that the probable outcome would be a draw with correct play by the engine's opponent, then the engine might go into a "maintain the draw" subroutine. While in this subroutine, the engine would make the moves necessary to maintain the draw, repeating the position over and over again until position repeated three times. When position repeated three times, the engine would then claim the draw. This would eliminate any possibility of the engine falling into any traps. Bob D. Bob D.
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.