Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Improving 6 men index scheme

Author: Vincent Diepeveen

Date: 15:29:54 09/09/02

Go up one level in this thread


On September 09, 2002 at 16:20:34, GuyHaworth wrote:

>V
>
>May I recommend, without bias, Nalimov, Haworth and Heinz (2000), ICGA v23.3,
>"Space-Efficient Indexing of Endgame Tables for Chess".

>ICGA_J is available from all good ICGA websites - see www.icga.org newly in
>development.
>
>
>There is a similar publication in the Adv. Comp. Games 9 book (2001):  ditto re
>ICGA_J websites.

that's the book i referred to in my other posting here. it's useless to me.
talking about optimizations i do not care for.

>
>Those papers step you through a generally-applicable description of Nalimov
>indexing including:
>
>a)  Kings not adjacent - hence the 462/1806
>
>b)  N Like Men treated with generality - no 'side table' needed

that's unreadable crap pseudo code.

>c)  "unblockable checks" not indexed - but you obviously want to skip this

i am for now not interested in STM dependant optimizations

>d)  generalised treatment of castling rights and e.p.

castling is not interesting obviously, a game where both opponents play
to win, will always have castled or lost castling rights long before
they get into endgames.

>
>The ideas that Eugene has not used, at least in public, yet are:
>
>e)  endgames with Pawns partitioned up front by Pawn position
>    - but watch out for the fact that you equate a1 and h1 by 'mirroring'
>    - this is becoming necessary if you don't use 64-bit addressing

64 bits is a good advice for everyone with regard to EGTBs. everything
i do is 64 bits in egtbs.

>f)  using DTZ rather than DTC or DTM metric - smaller depths involved
>    - just delays having to go beyond a byte/entry in uncompressed EGT
>    [ - however only 'DTR' guarantees you don't incur the avoidable 50m-draw ]

as you should know by now i'm a factor 10 more efficient here
by using win/draw/loss only. obviously mate in 61 i consider a mate
too. that's a small price for a factor 50 in size (compresses better
than DTM/DTZ/DTC.

>g)  replacing 'broken' values by 'last unbroken' values to aid compression

win/draw/loss as i said you have just 3 choices no weird values :)

>The 'neatest' properly retrograde (as per Ken Thompson) algorithm is by Wu and
>Beale (IS and ICGA_J) but this has not been used in a major way on Western Chess
>EGTs.

>If your index-range calculations are right, and I've not seen these figures
>before so that's a "first", 3Tera _is_ 3Tera and you can't compress the index
>below that.
>You can however compress the physical EGT when generated.

about 150GB i estimate it at for all up to 6 men.
uncompressed the 5 men if you calculated right are a bit less than
7 gigabyte *uncompressed*, which is already less than nalimov
compressed and the outcome of the game is the same!

>
>It is an open question as to whether avoiding indexing "unblockable check
>positions" is sufficient 'value' in the context of 'g' ... and in the context of
>a possible requirement to build a fast inverse-index function which does
>Pos(Index) rather than Index(Pos).
>
>A second open question is whether it is better to place all the sntm men first -
>as then all successors of a position will be in the same partition of the EGT
>(in the absence of pre-placed Pawns).  The idea of placing the two Kings first
>goes back to the 462/1806 economy but that can be effected anyway when placing
>the 2nd King later.

>That's most of the 'future agenda' on EGT-generation afaik.
>Good luck.

>g

>PS:  I am in the market for reasonable request of and information for the ICGA
>website.

It would be a great idea to put the icga articles online, though that
generates a bit less income for the icga, it would make the ICGA a
very serious organization also for those who want to start programming
gameplaying, as a return many might register to the icga, i'm positive
on that.

It's a great idea to put articles online there. For sure whatever i
write will be open to put on your homepage for that, also loads of
other stuff needs to be published there then which doesn't fit in
a few pages of the paper (logfiles and such).






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.