Author: robert flesher
Date: 20:17:38 12/10/02
Go up one level in this thread
On December 10, 2002 at 19:55:48, Ricardo Gibert wrote: >On December 10, 2002 at 18:53:21, Mike S. wrote: > >>Maybe it should be called "The Mig Fortress" better, because it'S Mig's >>comprehensive analysis of game no. 6 of the Bahrain match which ends with this >>position: >> >>[D]8/5k1p/5q2/8/1R6/6P1/5P2/6K1 b - - 0 45 >> >>White's rook can go to f4 or h4, and "Black has no way through the fortress." >> >>http://www.chessbase.com/images2/2002/bahrain/games/mig6.htm (see after the last >>move on the bottom of the page) >> >>I think the fortress idea is something especially difficult for chess programs, >>because it's very "general", IOW not related to a special pattern or material >>balance. > > >There are a number of abilities that are closely associated with chess mastery, >but nevertheless have very little or no effect on playing strength overall. >Recognizing such fortresses is one of them. > >Don't get me wrong. I *do* think the topic is an interesting one. However, such >positions are rare and detection would be too costly. Perhaps limiting detection >to the root position would be okay, but that would not add to playing strength. >It would only help the program to offer/accept draws in a more timely fashion. > > >> >>I wonder if an idea from the incomplete tbs. problem could be used to detect >>fortresses: With the pawn just before the promotion, but the tablebases for the >>resulting material missing, the idea was like: "If it's # in 14, but one move >>later *not* # in 13 or less, then there must be something wrong and I have to >>promote the pawn (even if the eval is less than mate then, at first)." >> >>The situation is somewhat similar in a fortress position, when one side has a >>more or less huge material advantage (which would normally be capable of >>winning), but can't make any significant progress for a long series of moves. >> >>Testing such a detection would probably require to have the engine actually play >>some f moves, so the engine could recognise that there is no progress... >>Although, with usual search depths of ~12 or more plies (+ extensions), maybe >>that is sufficient for the idea too. >> >>Are there engines known to have a fortress detection? >> >>Regards, >>M.Scheidl
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.