Author: Tony Werten
Date: 00:03:55 02/18/04
Go up one level in this thread
On February 17, 2004 at 20:55:13, Dann Corbit wrote: >On February 17, 2004 at 12:03:03, Tord Romstad wrote: > >>On February 17, 2004 at 08:19:28, martin fierz wrote: >> >>>On February 17, 2004 at 07:55:32, Tord Romstad wrote: >>> >>>>KR vs KP is a difficult one. Does anybody have any good suggestions about >>>>how to evaluate it? At the moment I don't have any specific code for this >>>>endgame at all, and Gothmog almost always evaluates it as a win for the rook. >>>>In reality, it is of course very often a draw. >>> >>>i'll have to think about this one too. i haven't done either KR-KP or KQ-KP; >>>KQ-KP should be rather easy as there are basically only two drawing positions; >> >>Yes. KQ-KP is much easier, and also less important, because the probability >>of a draw is much smaller here. >> >>>KR-KP is much harder. but you should at least be able to easily identify many >>>cases where KR is clearly winning; e.g. any time the KR-side king is in the >>>square of the pawn KR is winning (with one exception: wKe2, bPd2, bKf1/f2, black >>>to move, but qsearch should catch that). >> >>This is a good start, but I think it might be more valuable to work >>from the other end: Which positions do we know are drawn? I guess >>the probability of a draw is big if the pawn is on the fifth rank or >>beyond and supported by the king, and the attacking king is far away. >>But this is certainly too simple to be a sure drawing rule. >> >>There is also not many clear rules to be found in Keres' "Practical >>Chess Endings" (my main endgame reference), which makes me fear that >>it is not easy to evaluate this endgame correctly. > >Here's a dumb idea: > >Write a program to scan a Nalimov database, but throw away everything except >won/lost/drawn/broken (needs 2 bits per reflected board position to store the >outcome state). > >Then write a table. > >For up to the 4 man tables, it should be really tiny and fit into ram without >any fuss. Mine take less than 16 MB. Tony > >Seems like one single program could write a recognizer for anything [for which a >Nalimov or Edwards or Thompson EGTB exists].
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.