Author: Uri Blass
Date: 00:15:46 09/11/03
Go up one level in this thread
On September 11, 2003 at 00:25:21, Christophe Theron wrote: >On September 10, 2003 at 20:09:33, Uri Blass wrote: > >>On September 10, 2003 at 19:18:24, Christophe Theron wrote: >> >>>On September 10, 2003 at 03:38:08, Uri Blass wrote: >>> >>>>On September 10, 2003 at 03:15:29, Christophe Theron wrote: >>>> >>>>>On September 10, 2003 at 00:01:19, Mike Byrne wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>On September 09, 2003 at 23:25:59, Christophe Theron wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>On September 09, 2003 at 20:47:19, Mike Byrne wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>http://www.chessgenius.com/pc/ >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>New features of version 7.1 >>>>>>>>Improved graphics: >>>>>>>>Better support for high resolution displays. >>>>>>>>Addition piece sets. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>Author: Richard Lang, one of the great Chess Programmers from the early years. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>I currently have Chess Genius 3 installed on my Win2K machine thanks to this >>>>>>>>link. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>webpage >>>>>>>>http://www.gambitchess.com/progr.htm >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>direct link >>>>>>>>http://www.gambitchess.com/pub/cg3dos.zip >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>Although I am registered use Chess Genius 3, my disk has gone bad a long time >>>>>>>>ago. I believe Chess Genius 3 will still do reasonanbly well against many of >>>>>>>>the top programs today on equal hardware at fast time controls. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>No I'm sorry, it always loses with a significant margin. Even if you play >>>>>>>bullet. You have to use very slow hardware and fast time controls and you will >>>>>>>indeed see it do "reasonably well". But on todays hardware, even at fast time >>>>>>>controls I would not say that Genius is still competitive. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>That surprises me -- but if you say so. At longer time controls does it do >>>>>>better on faster hardware -- or is strictly short tc games on slow hardware? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>When you use faster hardware (or longer time controls, that's the same), Genius >>>>>is even less competitive. >>>> >>>>It is not exactly the same. >>>>There are programs that earn more speed from faster hardware. >>>> >>>>Genius was written when the old hardware was used so it is logical to expect it >>>>to be relatively faster in old hardware. >>>> >>>>It may be interesting also to compare time for solution in old hardware and in >>>>new hardware. >>>> >>>>Maybe you may find that new programs are 10 times faster on the new hardware >>>>when Genius is only 5 times faster. >>>> >>>>> >>>>>My own experience. >>>>> >>>>>Chess Genius has a kind of "explosive" power. It will find some combinations in >>>>>0.01s when other programs need 0.5s on modern hardware. But from then it gets >>>>>worse. In general if you expect a modern program to need one minute to find a >>>>>combination, expect Genius to need 2 or more. >>>>> >>>>>I have an idea about the origin of this problem, but I'm not certain. >>>> >>>>I think that one problem is that genius(at least genius3) limit its extensions. >>>>selective search cannot be more than 12 plies. >>>> >>>>There are cases when you need to extend more than 12 plies in order to solve >>>>hard combinations. >>>> >>>>Uri >>> >>> >>> >>>I'm not sure if the so-called "selective search" part of Genius is limited this >>>way. I'm also not sure if the "non selective" part is selective or not. So in >>>the end it's very hard to tell what is meant by "selective part" in Genius. >>> >>>But anyway I don't think it is relevant in this case. Even if extensions are >>>limited to 12 plies it's not a real handicap. Maybe limiting them to 3 or 4 >>>plies would be, but 12 is high enough to hardly notice any problem. >>> >>> >>> >>> Christophe >> >>The following position was posted by dana some days ago when genius cannot see >>the mate even after hours when chessmaster see it immediately. >> >>[D]4r1r1/bB4p1/8/2p1kPKn/n7/3R4/3P4/2B5 w - - >> >>It is clear that with only 12 plies of extension you are not going to see mate >>in 16 in a reasonable time. >> >>It is logical to give more plies of extension with more time and genius >>extensions seem to be limited. >> >>Uri > > > >If it is the same position that I have seen some days ago, the answer is >different. > >Chess Genius seems to have a hard limit of 32 plies. Seeing a mate in 16 may >require to be able to see 33 plies deep, and that is the most likely reason why >Genius cannot solve this mate. > >That's exactly what I have said when this position was posted. I know you said >it was because of the 12 plies selective search, but apparently you did not read >my answer. The limit of 12 plies is relevant because it means that even at depth 18 Genius cannot see the mate and from experience Genius(at least Genius3) even after a long time cannot get even depth 18. Programs usually see it in clearly smaller depth than 18 so it is clear that not extending make the program slower. I believe that Genius does a lot of extensions in depth 5/17(otherwise it could not play better than other programs at fixed depth) but all of them are in the first 17 plies. 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.