Author: Uri Blass
Date: 01:42:36 12/13/03
Go up one level in this thread
On December 13, 2003 at 04:35:54, martin fierz wrote: >On December 12, 2003 at 20:43:25, Dann Corbit wrote: > >>In solving WAC at 5 seconds per position on a 950 MHz AMD Athlon machine, Crafty >>solves 294 out of 300. That is pretty run of the mill as far as top engines go. >> >>What is really interesting is how quickly the remaining unsolved 6 problems are >>solved. I would be amazed if any engine can match it on like hardware. > >i would be *very* amazed if no other engine would beat it on like hardware! >here's what my pathetic engine (muse 0.876) does on a pathetic computer (P4 >1.4GHz, probably similar to what you were using): > >>============================================================================== >>WAC.230 solved in 17.74 seconds. Absolutlely stunning! >>============================================================================== >=> no chance for muse to solve this. > >>PFGA: EPD record: 2 ID: WAC.131 >> 10 6.74 ++ 1. Re8!! >>============================================================================== >>WAC.131 solved in 6.74 seconds. Almost solved in the 5 seconds alloted... >>============================================================================== > >FEN: 2rq1bk1/p4p1p/1p4p1/3b4/3B1Q2/8/P4PpP/3RR1K1 w - - 0 0 >depth eval time nodes kN/s QS BR NR pv > 1/4 -238 0.00s 58 74.0 22 50 0 f2f3 . > 2/10 -187 0.11s 557 8.4 40 63 68 f4e5 f7f6 e5f6 . > 3/10 -187 0.11s 982 13.2 33 67 84 f4e5 f7f6 e5f6 . > 4/17 86 0.55s 6068 15.9 31 80 84 e1e8 c8c1 e8f8 d8f8 d1c1 . > 5/18 200 1.38s 37437 35.1 23 86 87 e1e8 c8a8 e8d8 a8d8 f2f3 . >=> WAC.131 solved in 0.55 seconds, much faster than crafty > > > >>PFGA: EPD record: 3 ID: WAC.141 >> 9 13.11 ++ 1. Qxf4!! >>============================================================================== >>WAC.141 solved in 13.11 seconds. This one causes many engines problems. >>============================================================================== >> >> 9 55.23 Mat06 1. Qxf4 Bxf4 2. Rxh5 gxh5 3. Rxh5 Bh6 > >unfortunately i don't print out when i fail high in the log file - happens after >a similar amount of time as crafty. > >FEN: 4r1k1/p1qr1p2/2pb1Bp1/1p5p/3P1n1R/1B3P2/PP3PK1/2Q4R w - - 0 0 >depth eval time nodes kN/s QS BR NR pv > 1/4 -170 0.00s 9 13.0 31 0 0 g2g1 . > 2/8 -280 0.00s 90 151.0 40 87 0 g2f1 e8e2 . > 3/10 -195 0.05s 640 18.6 33 83 28 g2f1 g8h7 f1g1 . > 4/15 -229 0.22s 3818 25.9 33 87 64 g2f1 f4d5 b3d5 c6d5 . > 5/18 -217 1.15s 26762 34.7 33 88 77 g2f1 a7a5 f6e5 d6e5 d4e5 . > 6/28 31989 49.32s 2325195 56.8 17 89 95 c1f4 d6f4 h4h5 g6h5 h1h5 f4h6 >h5h6 . > >=> mate score found in about the same time as crafty > > >>PFGA: EPD record: 4 ID: WAC.163 >>============================================================================== >>WAC.163 solved in 5.12 seconds. A hair's breadth from regular 5 second solution >>============================================================================== >=> no chance for muse > >>PFGA: EPD record: 5 ID: WAC.002 >> 12 12.25 -2.03 1. ... Rxb2 2. Rxb2 c3 3. Rb6+ Kf7 >>============================================================================== >>WAC.002 solved in 12.25 seconds. Lots of engines struggle with this one. >>============================================================================== >FEN: 8/7p/5k2/5p2/p1p2P2/Pr1pPK2/1P1R3P/8 b - - 0 0 >depth eval time nodes kN/s QS BR NR pv > 1/2 84 0.05s 19 0.4 14 0 0 b3b8 . > 2/6 89 0.05s 80 2.4 35 66 71 b3b8 e3e4 . > 3/6 79 0.05s 309 7.4 18 69 69 b3b8 e3e4 h7h6 . > 4/10 77 0.11s 1404 16.2 22 88 76 b3b8 e3e4 f6e6 f3e3 . > 5/14 72 0.16s 4809 35.4 16 89 79 b3b8 e3e4 f6e6 e4e5 h7h6 f3e3 . > 6/14 129 0.27s 11402 48.3 13 92 85 c4c3 b2c3 b3c3 e3e4 c3a3 e4e5 >f6e6 . > 7/20 68 1.26s 50011 45.6 13 91 84 b3b8 e3e4 f6e6 d2g2 e6f6 e4e5 >f6e6 . > 8/22 292 3.68s 144219 44.6 12 91 87 b3b2 d2b2 c4c3 b2b6 f6g7 f3f2 >c3c2 b6c6 d3d2 c6c2 d2d1q . > 9/22 282 5.38s 226837 47.1 11 92 88 b3b2 d2b2 c4c3 b2b6 f6f7 b6b7 >f7g8 f3f2 c3c2 b7c7 d3d2 c7c2 d2d1q . > >=> solved in 3.68 seconds, significantly faster than crafty > > >>PFGA: EPD record: 6 ID: WAC.092 >> 8 6.13 ++ 1. ... Bxg4!! >>============================================================================== >>WAC.092 solved in 6.13 seconds. Nearly solved in the standard 5 seconds... >>============================================================================== >> >> 8 7.80 -0.59 1. ... Bxg4 2. e5 Bxf3 3. Qxf3 Nh5 >> 4. Nd5 Qd8 5. Qg2 e6 >FEN: r4rk1/1p2ppbp/p2pbnp1/q7/3BPPP1/2N2B2/PPP4P/R2Q1RK1 b - - 0 0 >depth eval time nodes kN/s QS BR NR pv > 1/6 74 0.11s 62 1.1 47 80 0 e6c4 . > 2/12 78 0.17s 468 9.3 71 97 66 e6c4 f1e1 . > 3/15 61 0.22s 2117 18.3 48 95 60 e6c4 f3e2 a8c8 . > 4/17 61 0.44s 7073 27.2 41 96 85 e6c4 f3e2 a8c8 e2c4 . > 5/24 54 4.18s 101755 47.2 48 88 77 e6c4 g4g5 f6h5 d4g7 h5g7 . > 6/25 60 8.74s 234281 49.5 46 92 84 e6c4 f1e1 e7e5 d4f2 e5f4 d1d6 . > 7/26 156 15.49s 475203 50.9 40 91 85 e6g4 f3g4 f6g4 c3d5 g7d4 d1d4 >f8e8 d4b4 a5b4 d5b4 . > 8/26 122 22.91s 713057 49.5 37 92 87 e6g4 f3g4 f6g4 c3d5 g7d4 d1d4 >f8e8 h2h3 g4h6 d5b6 a8d8 . > >=> solved in 15.5 seconds, again, the fail high was a bit earlier. > >note that 230 and 002 are very much about evaluation of advanced connected >passers, not really about tactics. >in games, crafty kills my engine all the time, it scores around 90% or so. >i'm also impressed by crafty - but not because of what it does in these test >positions :-) > >>I'm certainly impressed. Time to try some tougher sets and see what happens. >try ECMGCP and compare it with ruffian? > >cheers > martin or even only with knightdreamer Results copied from knightdreamer homepage http://www3.tripnet.se/~owemelin/johan/KnightDreamer.html Testsuit results for KnightDreamer 3.1 on 733MHz PIII(seconds/problem): WAC: 0.1 254/300 1 290/300 5 297/300 ECM-GCP 0.1 29/183 1 76/183 5 118/183 20 140/183 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.