Author: Ernst A. Heinz
Date: 02:00:14 11/18/98
Go up one level in this thread
On November 17, 1998 at 06:36:49, Ernst A. Heinz wrote: >On November 16, 1998 at 18:19:53, Amir Ban wrote: > >>On November 16, 1998 at 14:50:57, Bruce Moreland wrote: >> >>>r1r1q1k1/6p1/p2b1p1p/1p1PpP2/PPp5/2P4P/R1B2QP1/R5K1 w - - 0 1 >>> >>>It has been contended that this move would be difficult for a computer to find, >>>and this has caused some doubts to be raised as to whether the computer found it >>>without assistance in this game. >>> >>>I would like to ask how we can clear this up absent input from DB. >>> >>>Has anybody run this for a long period on a micro, and if so, was any move >>>selected other than 35. Qb6? >>> >>>Is the counter-attacking line 35. Qb6 Qe7 36. axb5 Rab8 37. Qxa6 e4 supposedly >>>the reason that white shouldn't play 35. Qb6? Or is it some other line? If it >>>is too hard or impossible to find 35. axb5, would finding this line show >>>anything? >>> >>>Is there some minimum score delta we can achieve between the position after 35. >>>axb5 and 35. Qb6 that might be evidence that DB should be given the benefit of >>>the doubt? >>> >>>Are these questions unfair or wrong, if so, are their other questions that can >>>be asked and possibly answered that will help clear this up? >>> >>>bruce >> >> >>This is move 36 but the other details are correct. >> >>The first time this was discussed on CCC, Chris Whittington was still here, and >>he reported for CSTal. It was closer than others, but still couldn't bridge the >>gap. > >I fed this position into the current "DarkThought" yesterday and it liked Qb6 >with a score of roughly +1.7 up to iteration #18 inclusively. Then, it failed >low on Qb6 (score <= 1.39) in iteration #19 after processing 6,490,725,565 >nodes. Currently, it is still engaged in resolving the fail-low (see below). > >//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// > >r1r1q1k1/6p1/p2b1p1p/1p1PpP2/PPp5/2P4P/R1B2QP1/R5K1 w - - 0 1 > ># Clearing chess engine. ># Engine sleeps. >- - > +------------------------+ >8 |*R :::*R :::*Q :::*K :::| >7 |::: ::: ::: *P: | >6 |*P ::: *B: *P: *P:| >5 |:::*P ::: P *P: P ::: | >4 | P :P:*P ::: ::: :::| >3 |::: :P: ::: ::: P | >2 | R ::: B ::: :Q: P :::| >1 |:R: ::: ::: :K: | > +------------------------+ > a b c d e f g h > >14.01 Qb6 Rd8 Be4 Rac8 Qxa6 bxa4 Qxa4 Qxa4 Rxa4 Rd7 ... (1.71) #62711053 >15.01 Qb6 Rd8 Be4 Rac8 Qxa6 bxa4 Qxa4 Qh5 Kh2 Qg5 ... (1.69) #140398448 >16.01 Qb6 Rd8 Be4 Rac8 Qxa6 bxa4 Qxa4 Qh5 Qa7 ... (1.70) #423411650 >17.01 Qb6 Rd8 Be4 Rac8 Qxa6 bxa4 Qxa4 Qh5 Qa7 Qh4 ... (1.73) #1230726361 >18.01 Qb6 Rd8 Be4 a5 axb5 axb4 Rxa8 Rxa8 Rxa8 Qxa8 ... (1.64) #3337837066 >19.01 Qb6 <=178? (1.39) #6490725565 > >//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// I run this on a 500MHz Alpha-21164a and the fail-low of iteration #19 got resolved to +1.26 after 14:34 hours and 11,196,023,081 nodes (see below). >19.01? Qb6 Rd8 Be4 a5 axb5 axb4 Rxa8 Rxa8 Rxa8 Qxa8 ... (1.26) #11196023081 I will let "DarkThought" continue the calculation as long as the other people at our institute do not get too angry at me for blocking so many Alphas ... :-) =Ernst=
This page took 0.06 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.