Author: Alessandro Damiani
Date: 14:33:27 07/08/03
Go up one level in this thread
On July 08, 2003 at 10:40:28, Uri Blass wrote: >On July 08, 2003 at 10:28:55, Djordje Vidanovic wrote: > >>On July 07, 2003 at 16:47:09, Uri Blass wrote: >> >>>On July 07, 2003 at 16:44:28, Djordje Vidanovic wrote: >>> >>>>Here's the clip from the newest Ruffian engine: >>>> >>>>New game >>>>4rqn1/p3brk1/R5p1/6Bp/1p5Q/1B1R4/PPP2PPP/6K1 w - - 0 1 >>>> >>>>Analysis by Ruffian 2003-06-23: >>>> >>>>1.Rxg6+ Kxg6 2.Rh3 Bxg5 3.Qxh5+ Kf5 4.Rf3+ Ke5 5.Rxf7 Qh6 6.Qe2+ Be3 7.fxe3 >>>> +- (7.53) Depth: 1/7 00:00:00 >>>>1.Rxg6+ Kxg6 2.Rh3 Bxg5 3.Qxh5+ Kf5 4.Rf3+ Ke5 5.Rxf7 Qh6 6.Qe2+ Be3 7.fxe3 >>>> +- (7.53) Depth: 1/7 00:00:00 >>>>1.Rxg6+ Kxg6 2.Rh3 Bxg5 3.Qxh5+ Kf5 4.Rf3+ Ke5 5.Rxf7 Qh6 6.Qe2+ Be3 7.fxe3 >>>> +- (7.53) Depth: 2/7 00:00:00 >>>>1.Rxg6+ Kxg6 2.Rh3 Bxg5 3.Qxh5+ Kf5 4.Rf3+ Ke5 5.Rxf7 Qh6 6.Qe2+ Be3 7.fxe3 >>>> +- (7.53) Depth: 3/10 00:00:00 >>>>1.Rxg6+ Kxg6 2.Rh3 Bxg5 3.Qxh5+ Kf5 4.Rf3+ Ke5 5.Rxf7 Qh6 6.Qe2+ Be3 7.fxe3 >>>> +- (7.53) Depth: 4/10 00:00:00 >>>>1.Rxg6+ Kxg6 2.Rh3 Bxg5 3.Qxh5+ Kf5 4.Rf3+ Ke5 5.Rxf7 Qh6 6.Qe2+ Be3 7.fxe3 >>>> +- (7.53) Depth: 5/11 00:00:00 >>>>1.Rxg6+ Kxg6 2.Rh3 Bxg5 3.Qxh5+ Kf5 4.Rf3+ Ke5 5.Rxf7 Qh6 6.Qe2+ Be3 7.fxe3 >>>> +- (7.53) Depth: 6/13 00:00:00 16kN >>>>1.Rxg6+ Kxg6 2.Rh3 Bxg5 3.Qxh5+ Kf5 4.Rf3+ Ke5 5.Rxf7 Qh6 6.Qe2+ Be3 7.fxe3 >>>> +- (7.53) Depth: 7/17 00:00:00 86kN >>>>1.Rxg6+ Kxg6 2.Rh3 Bxg5 3.Qxh5+ Kf5 4.Rf3+ Ke5 5.Rxf7 Qh6 6.Qe2+ Be3 7.fxe3 >>>> +- (7.53) Depth: 8/20 00:00:00 202kN >>>>1.Rxg6+ Kxg6 2.Rh3 Bxg5 3.Qxh5+ Kf5 4.Rf3+ Ke5 5.Rxf7 Qh6 6.Qe2+ Be3 7.fxe3 >>>> +- (7.53) Depth: 9/20 00:00:00 448kN >>> >>>I suspect that it learned from previous analysis. >>>The line and the score was not changed from depth 1. >>> >>>Uri >> >> >>Which previous analysis? I just copied the fen into Ruffian and let him >>analyse. No previous analysis. Wrong suspicion :) Ruffian is a very smart >>program... >> >>Djordje > >It does not make sense that a program has a pv of 13 plies at depth 1 when the >pv and the score are unchanged until depth 9 except number of nodes. > It is possible due to extensions. At depth 1 the PV is extended 13 plies deep. The following iterations can produce the same pv and therefore the same score if the extensions at depth 1 already produced the best sequence of moves up to ply 13. This behaviour happens also with a simple full-width search followed by a capture search: if at the horizon of the full-width search - on the pv - a capture is forced, the next iteration will have the same pv with the same depth and score. Rgds, Alessandro
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.