Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 18:49:10 02/02/03
Go up one level in this thread
On February 02, 2003 at 21:41:03, Mike Hood wrote: >To quote the words of a cynic during the Chessbase commentary on Kasparov-DJ >Game 4: "I doubt whether more than 1% of all positions in the tablebases have >been checked independently. And a mathematical proof of their correctness is not >easy at all." > >Let's forget the cynicism for a moment. I personally have no doubt in the >accuracy of the tablebases, based on my empirical observations of a few >positions extrapolated to the millions of other positions. My question is: Is a >mathematical proof of tablebase accuracy at all possible? yes, because they are the result of a pure breadth-first depth from every possible position , working backward thru the game. A breadth-first search can be proven to find the shortest possible mate (or win in a more general sense). This is covered in most any AI book that discusses minimax, alpha/beta, depth-first, breadth-first, graph search, etc...
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.