Author: Christophe Theron
Date: 19:08:55 11/16/02
Go up one level in this thread
On November 16, 2002 at 22:00:27, Bob Durrett wrote:
>
>I was thinking it might be *fun* to create a machine which does nothing more
>than create legal move sequences from some preset legal chess position. These
>sequences might be dumped into a large part of RAM for later copy to a hard disk
>or printout.
>
>The key idea I'm toying with is to represent a chess position by a listing of
>legal moves. Whenever a new move is made [by the person (or thing) playing
>against the machine, or by the machine if it's playing against itself,] then the
>machine would do nothing more than modify that listing (plus copy the move
>representation to a temporary storage place in RAM). The new listing of legal
>moves would then represent the new position. The key idea is to represent a
>position by a listing of legal moves. When a move is made, there is a "from"
>square and a "to" square. Only consequences of changes made on these two
>squares would have to be considered to modify the legal move list.
>
>Then, to make it more interesting, a really fast random number generator would
>be used to select one of the resulting legal moves. If the machine were playing
>against itself, the sequences of moves should be generated very quickly. How
>quickly?
>
>In the beginning, I am only interested in the time it would take to modify that
>listing. The machine could play both sides, removing the need for
>time-consuming input/output. After generating a legal move sequence ending in
>mate, it would then start working on the next legal move sequence. After a
>million or so moves were made, then the time required could be divided by the
>number of moves. That resulting time per move that I'm asking about. Rather
>than worry about the fact that some computers are faster than others, maybe the
>best bet would be to express it as number of clock cycles per move. A modern
>high-end processor should be assumed.
>
>Each sequence would be what two "really dumb" chessplayers would produce if they
>knew how to produce legal moves but knew NOTHING at all else about chess.
>
>P.S. Is there a better way?
>
>Bob D.
Don't you need to prove first that two different chess positions will always
have a different legal moves list? And that there exist no move list that could
be associated with two different chess positions?
Christophe
This page took 0.01 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.