Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: CCC (C-compiler contest)

Author: F. Huber

Date: 03:33:01 01/07/04

Go up one level in this thread


On January 07, 2004 at 00:41:35, K. Burcham wrote:

>
>Mr. Huber, notice difference in depth.
>
> [D] 3Q4/5q1k/4ppp1/2Kp1N1B/RR6/3P1r2/4nP1b/3b4 w - -
>
>Shredder 7.04
>
>  7/27	 0:01 	+9.55 	1.Bxf3 d4 2.Rb7 Qxb7 3.Bxb7 gxf5 4.Ra8 Be5 5.Qg8+ Kh6
>(547.202) 486.4
>  8/23	 0:01 	+9.80++	1.Bxf3 d4 2.Rb7 Qxb7 3.Bxb7 exf5 4.Ra8 g5 5.Qxf6 Bb8
>(639.872) 481.8
>  8/23	 0:01 	+10.30++	1.Bxf3 d4 2.Rb7 Qxb7 3.Bxb7 exf5 4.Ra8 Nf4 5.Qh8+
>(686.336) 482.6
>  8/27	 0:01 	+10.64	1.Bxf3 Nd4 2.Ra8 Qc7+ 3.Qxc7+ Bxc7 4.Nxd4 Bxf3 5.Rb7 Kh6
>6.Rxc7 (837.840) 487.3
>  9/25	 0:02 	+10.74	1.Bxf3 Nd4 2.Ra8 Qc7+ 3.Qxc7+ Bxc7 4.Nxd4 Bxf3 5.Rb7 Kh6
>6.Rxc7 Bg4 (1.147.922) 483.3
> 10/30	 0:03 	+10.99++	1.Bxf3 Nd4 2.Ra8 Qc7+ 3.Qxc7+ Bxc7 4.Nxd4 Bxf3 5.Rb7 Kg7
>6.Rxc7+ Kh6 (1.753.798) 477.6
> 10/30	 0:04 	+11.49++	1.Bxf3 Nd4 2.Ra8 Qc7+ 3.Qxc7+ Bxc7 4.Nxd4 Bxf3 5.Nxe6 f5
>6.Nxc7 (1.908.000) 477.0
> 10/30	 0:04 	+12.00	1.Bxf3 Nd4 2.Ra8 Qc7+ 3.Qxc7+ Bxc7 4.Nxd4 Bxf3 5.Nxe6 g5
>6.Nxc7 d4 7.Rab8 (2.315.300) 481.1
> 11/32	 0:07 	+12.25++	1.Bxf3 Nd4 2.Ra8 Qc7+ 3.Qxc7+ Bxc7 4.Nxd4 Bxf3 5.Nxf3 f5
>6.Rb7 g5 7.Rxc7+ (3.595.104) 483.4
> 11/32	 0:08 	+12.75++	1.Bxf3 Nd4 2.Ra8 Qc7+ 3.Qxc7+ Bxc7 4.Nxd4 Bxf3 5.Nxf3 g5
>6.Rb7 Kg6 7.Rxc7 (3.971.160) 481.3
> 11/36	 0:11 	+14.42	1.Bxf3 Nd4 2.Ra8 Qc7+ 3.Qxc7+ Bxc7 4.Nxd4 Bxf3 5.Nxf3 Kh6
>6.Rh4+ Kg7 7.Ra7 g5 8.Rxc7+ Kg6 (5.326.054) 481.4
> 12/36	 0:18 	+14.64	1.Bxf3 Nd4 2.Ra8 Qc7+ 3.Qxc7+ Bxc7 4.Nxd4 Bxf3 5.Nxf3 Kh6
>6.Rh4+ Kg7 7.Ra7 g5 8.Rxc7+ Kg6 9.Rhh7 Kf5 (8.759.772) 486.2
> 12/36	 0:20 	+14.65++	1.Rb7 Bc7 2.Rxc7 Bxa4 3.Rxf7+ (9.783.777) 486.9
> 12/36	 0:20 	+15.00++	1.Rb7 Bc7 2.Rxc7 exf5 3.Rxf7+ Kh6 4.Bxf3 Bxa4 5.Bxe2 Bc2
>(9.800.037) 486.9
> 12/36	 0:20 	  +M7 	1.Rb7 Qxb7 2.Bxg6+ Kxg6 3.Qg8+ Qg7 4.Qxg7+ Kxf5 5.Qg4+ Ke5
>6.Re4+ dxe4 7.Qxe4+ (10.022.800) 487.4
> 13/13	 0:20 	  +M7 	1.Rb7 Qxb7 2.Bxg6+ Kxg6 3.Qg8+ Qg7 4.Qxg7+ Kxf5 5.Qg4+ Ke5
>6.Re4+ dxe4 7.Qxe4+ (10.169.727) 486.8
>best move: Rb4-b7 time: 0:22.313 min  n/s: 486.619  CPU 99.5%  nodes: 10.850.151
>
>
>ChestUCI Ver.3.1
>Franz Huber
>
>CPU: 2210 AMD xp
>FEN: 3Q4/5q1k/4ppp1/2Kp1N1B/RR6/3P1r2/4nP1b/3b4 w - -
>Search for Mate in 20 ...  (Hash=256MB)
>  9.23	 2:07 	  +M9 	1.Rb7 272.0
>Search completed ...  (Time=150.34s)
>Mate in 9 found !  (1 Solution in 02:30)
>  9/09	 2:30 	  +M9 	1.Rb7 Qxb7 2.Bxg6+ Kxg6 3.Qg8+ Kxf5 4.Qg4+ Ke5 5.Qh5+ Rf5
>6.f4+ Bxf4 7.Qxe2+ Bxe2 8.Re4+ dxe4 9.d4+ 266.2
>best move: Rb4-b7 time: 2:30.453 min  n/s: 266.245  nodes: 40.028.393

Hi Mr. Burcham!

That´s indeed very interesting - usually a normal chess engine is announcing
a mate in _more_ moves than the shortest one, but I´ve never seen before
an announcment of a mate in _less_ moves!?

This ´mate in 7´ of Shredder 7.04 is DEFINITELY WRONG - at least as _we_ would
interpret a ´mate in xx´: (maybe Shredder took its version number instead ;-))
This ´M7´ is one possible variation, but NOT if black defends himself OPTIMAL.
You can try this with ChestUCI - simply enter the first moves (which are the
same in Shredders and Chests main line) manually, and then let ChestUCI look for
the best defense with ´DefenderMoves=true´, i.e.:

after entering 1.Rb7 Qxb7 2.Bxg6+ Kxg6 3.Qg8+
start ChestUCI with ´DefenderMoves´:

ChestUCI Ver.3.1  UCI:

CPU: Celeron 400MHz
FEN: 6Q1/1q6/4ppk1/2Kp1N2/R7/3P1r2/4nP1b/3b4 b - -
Search for Mate in -10 ...  (Hash=48MB)
Search completed ...  (Time=0.50s)
Mate in -6 found !  (4 Solutions in 00:00)
 1   00:00 -M1  Kh5 Qg4+
 1   00:00 -M1  Kh5 Rh4+
 4   00:00 -M4  Qg7 Qxg7+ Kxf5 Qg4+ Ke5 Re4+ dxe4 Qxe4+
 6   00:00 -M6  Kxf5 Qg4+ Ke5 Qh5+ Rf5 f4+ Bxf4 Qxe2+ Bxe2 Re4+ dxe4 d4+

As you can see, Shredders ´solution (?)´ is also shown here (´-M4´), but the
optimal defense for black is the last line with ´-M6´, which is totally
the (correct) ´mate in 9´ from the starting position!

So this is one more example that would lead to the conclusion:
Never trust any mate announcement of a ´normal´ chess engine -
for this purpose there´s no other correct way than using a special
mate solver, and in my opinion Chest is (one of) _the best_! :)

Best regards,
Franz.




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.