Author: David Dory
Date: 15:43:59 02/07/04
Go up one level in this thread
On February 07, 2004 at 18:26:00, Uri Blass wrote: >I started to work on having some evaluation about endgame and >I wrote something to detect draws in KP vs K. > >It does not detect every possible draw but at least hopefully when it detect >draw it is correct if I have no bugs. > >Tablebases is not a solution because they are too slow and I believe that >generally functions are better because even in case of having tablebases if I do >not probe them in the qsearch I may get KP vs K that I need to evaluate without >tablebases and I want to return correct score without looking in tablebases. > >I read that yace is using bitbases even for 4 piece endgames when the bitbases >give only win draw loss information and I guess that the bitbases were >calculated from nalimov tablebases. > >I wonder what other people do in KP vs K endgame in case of not looking in >tablebases(because the program does not support tablebases or because it is a >qsearch node). > >Do they have a special function to detect the result or do they assume that >cases when they get KPK in the qsearch are rare enough when they use the 5 piece >tablebases because in most cases they probe the tablebases earlier. > >Uri As you say, I believe most programs would access their tablebases earlier. I always applaud adding knowledge to the endgame into the program itself, though. Can you give an example (diagram) of a position your code fails to find the draw with KP vs. K ? I don't see why a general heuristic could not solve this problem until the search could see it, and take your program to the draw. David
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.