Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Completely blocked positions, some interesting things

Author: Omid David

Date: 16:32:30 10/04/02

Go up one level in this thread


On October 04, 2002 at 19:09:22, Jeremiah Penery wrote:

>On October 04, 2002 at 18:06:21, Omid David wrote:
>
>>On October 04, 2002 at 17:27:05, Jeremiah Penery wrote:
>>
>>>On October 04, 2002 at 16:51:38, Roy Eassa wrote:
>>>
>>>>On October 03, 2002 at 19:18:16, Jeremiah Penery wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>[D]8/7p/6pP/k4pP1/b1p1pP2/KpPpP3/1P1P4/7Q w - - 0 1
>
>>No blockade-detecting algorithm should announce a draw in this position, since
>>the blockade can be "broken". And I think there might be a victory for white
>>hidden:
>>
>>
>>1.Qd1
>>
>>A) 1... Kb5
>>   2.Qh5
>>         i)  2... gxh5
>>             3.g6 hxg6 4.h7 white winning
>>         ii) 2... Ka5
>>             3.Qxg6 hxg6 4.h7 white winning
>>B) 1...Bc6 (or any other bishop move)
>>   2. Qxb3 cxb3 3.Kxb3 unclear situation
>
>My reasoning is that it's way harder to detect a blockade by search than it is
>to detect a winning line in some "blockaded" positions.  In this position, if
>Qd1 Bc6 Qxb3 etc. is winning for white, the search will find it pretty quickly.
>However, without detecting this as a blockade, the program will NEVER detect the
>draw, and it will shuffle the pieces around forever, while declaring itself
>winning by 6 pawns or more.  Either way, the end result will be a draw.
>
>My 'algorithm' is a pretty simple thing.  I just wanted it to be fast, and not
>miss any cases, though I didn't care too much for false cases (because of the
>above).  Unless my thing is 100% correct, and never misses any potential
>blockade draws, there will be error anyway (without the algorithm, you will say
>+6 in the position above, and many similar positions, though it is a draw - with
>the incorrect algorithm, you may say draw in some winning position).
>
>If there are cases where my stuff is completely and totally wrong, I will try to
>fix it.  Otherwise, I'll take some inaccuracy and be reasonably happy that it
>works most of the time.

Your perspective is really interesting, which allows a certain amounts of
"unharmful" inaccuracies.

My method on the other hand, refrains from declaring a draw, even if it's 99.99%
sure that it actually is. Anything less than 100.00% accuracy, and the returned
answer will be "I don't know!"







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.