Author: Uri Blass
Date: 22:44:13 08/11/03
Go up one level in this thread
On August 12, 2003 at 01:15:47, Anson T J wrote: >On August 11, 2003 at 03:04:55, Uri Blass wrote: > >>On August 11, 2003 at 01:36:45, Harald Faber wrote: >> >>>On August 10, 2003 at 13:57:00, Amir Ban wrote: >>> >>>>On August 09, 2003 at 19:11:16, Harald Faber wrote: >>>> >>>>>On August 09, 2003 at 05:55:43, Tony Hedlund wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>How can J8 allow game 14 to end as a draw? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>This is no serious question, isn't it? >>>>>It has been posted and mentioned approx. 1,000,000 times. It is the problem of >>>>>incomplete tablebases. AFAIK you/SSDF uses the "Fritz Endgame Turbo". Based on >>>>>the Chessbase marketing it consists of 4 CD-roms with "the most important >>>>>endgame tablebases". Based on what you saw in this game, what many many others - >>>>>include me - have seen in similar positions, it is crap. >>>>>Let me ask you a question. If your answer is yes, do I win a price? >>>>>Here is the US-$1,000,000 question: >>>>>Are you missing at least one of these files in your tablebase-directory? >>>>> >>>>>kqbkp.nbb.emd >>>>>kqbkp.nbw.emd >>>>>kqbkn.nbb.emd >>>>>kqbkn.nbw.emd >>>>>kqbkb.nbb.emd >>>>>kqbkb.nbw.emd >>>>>kqbkr.nbb.emd >>>>>kqbkr.nbw.emd >>>>>kqbkq.nbb.emd >>>>>kqbkq.nbw.emd >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>If you had them all(!), Junior 8 would have mated. >>>>> >>>>>Don't you think it is time to consider >>>>>a) adding the missing 5-man files or >>>>>b) kick the existing 5-man? >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>>I don't understand this explanation. Are you able to recreate this by omitting >>>>some 5-man files ? >>> >>> >>>Didn't try it. Have removed the files above from the tb path now but also cannot >>>reproduce. Maybe some (more) other tb files have to be removed? >> >>I think that the same tablebases is not enough and >>you may need to reprodce the all game with the same time of pondering >>to reproduce the bug because >>it is possible that learning from some previous analysis is responsible. >> >>The point of Amir is that not having tablebases is not the problem >>and even if by some luck having all the tablebases could prevent the problem >>then a similiar problem may happen even with all the tablebases. >>> >>> >>>>The log doesn't show what J8 was thinking. Apparently it thought it was mating , >>>>because it played all moves in 0 seconds. >>> >>> >>>Be5 is played here in several variations. >> >> >>I dislike this move. >> >>This is a result of bad evaluation. >>programs should translate mates from tablebases to numbers so in case of >>a simple win they will not play stupid sacrifices. >> >>I have not statistics of the average number of moves to win based on >>evaluation but a score of mate in 30 from tablebases should be transalted to >>+8.00 in the evaluation if based on statistics of thousands of games without >>tablebases >>top programs always win positions with 7.50-8.50 score and the average >>number of moves to win these positions games without tablebases is 30. >> >>Uri > >Some positions that are mate in 30 would yield a score of 1 or maybe even 0.5 >from some engines. Besides a mate in 30 is better than 7.5 or 9. If 9 is practically always winning and usually in less than 30 moves than 9 is better. If the mate is >trivial, the program should be able to solve it without the tbs. I'm sure there >are some positions which the engine wouldn't be able to solve in time pressure >meaning that lack of a vital tablebase would cost it half a point. I talked about the ssdf games when there is no time pressure. Uri
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.