Author: Will Singleton
Date: 16:08:33 06/05/04
Go up one level in this thread
On June 05, 2004 at 15:12:41, Anthony Cozzie wrote: >On June 05, 2004 at 12:32:47, Will Singleton wrote: > >>On June 05, 2004 at 10:13:35, Anthony Cozzie wrote: >> >>>On June 04, 2004 at 19:03:53, Anthony Cozzie wrote: >>> >>>>From Yace-Zappa >>>> >>>>[D]3q1rk1/pp1bppbp/3p1npB/8/2rNP1P1/2N2P2/PPPQ4/2KR3R b - - 0 16 >>>> >>>>1... Nf6xe4 2. f3xe4 Bg7xd4 3. Qd2-d3 b7-b5 4. Nc3-d5 Bd4-e5 5. Bh6xf8 Qd8xf8 6. >>>>g4-g5 Qf8-g7 7. c2-c3 Rc4-a4 8. Kc1-b1 Kg8-f8 >>>> = (0.32) Depth: 15/38 00:06:02.03 263847kN >>>> >>>>The game continued Nxe4 Qe3 Rxc3 bxc3 Qh6 Nf6 and now your program should be >>>>able to see g5! and white is able to win the queen. >>>> >>>>Anyone out there that can avoid Nxe4 in reasonable time? >>>> >>>>anthony >>> >>>OK, as has been pointed out by about 25 people, the mistake is not Nxe4, but >>>Bxh6 (a move which somehow I conviently omitted from the my line). >>> >>>[D]3q1rk1/pp1bppbp/3p2pB/8/3Nn1P1/2P1QP2/P1P5/2KR3R b - - 0 18 >>> >>>Even this one is pretty hard for Zappa, it needs 70 seconds to realize Bxh6 is >>>losing and 6 minutes switch to Nf6. >>> >>>1... Bg7xh6 2. Rh1xh6 Ne4-f6 3. Rd1-h1 e7-e5 4. Nd4-f5 Bd7xf5 5. g4xf5 Qd8-a5 6. >>>Qe3-g5 Qa5-a3 7. Kc1-d1 Kg8-g7 8. f5xg6 f7xg6 >>> = (0.50) Depth: 14/31 00:00:46.41 37517kN >>>1 ...Bg7xh6-- >>> - (0.25) Depth: 15/30 00:01:08.74 55010kN >>>1... Bg7xh6 2. Qe3xh6 Ne4-f6 3. g4-g5 Nf6-h5 4. Rh1xh5 g6xh5 5. Rd1-h1 Qd8-a5 6. >>>Rh1xh5 Bd7-f5 7. Nd4xf5 Qa5xf5 8. g5-g6 Qf5xg6 9. Rh5-g5 Rf8-c8 10. Rg5xg6 h7xg6 >>> = (-2.83) Depth: 15/34 00:03:02.47 147329kN >>>1... Ne4-f6 2. Bh6xg7 Kg8xg7 3. Nd4-f5 Bd7xf5 4. g4xf5 Qd8-a5 5. Qe3xe7 Qa5xa2 >>>6. Qe7xb7 Qa2-a3 7. Qb7-b2 Qa3-c5 8. f5xg6 f7xg6 9. Rh1-e1 Rf8-c8 10. Re1-e7 >>>Kg7-h6 >>> = (0.18) Depth: 15/36 00:05:34.28 269390kN >>> >>>anthony >> >> >>The time it takes to find Nf6 after seeing the problem with Bxh6 is rather long >>for some programs. For example, Crafty (3 min), Ruffian (1:30) and Zappa >>(2:30). This is because the problem occurs at a high search depth. >> >>Amateur does better in switching to the right move, taking only 10 sec. It does >>this by "cheating," which is to say, reducing the search depth when a large >>score drop occurs. I don't really see a downside to this. >> >>Crafty >>14 191 11683 124623699 1. ... Bxh6 2. Qxh6 Nf6 >>14 16 30945 341466474 1. ... Nf6 2. Bxg7 Kxg7 >> >>Ruffian >>14 -161 10004 121228508 Bxh6 Qxh6 Nf6 >>14 -5 18402 223090636 Nf6 Bxg7 Kxg7 >> >>Amateur >>16 -243 12517 49364251 Bxh6 Qxh6 Nf6 >>13 -243 12517 49364252 Bxh6 >>13 87 13581 53146356 Nf6 Bxg7 Kxg7 > > >Well, Zappa's move ordering is *horrible* here. The only problem I see with >reducing depth is that you could possibly enter a loop. It definitely is a >problem; I like the idea of doing a bit of iterative deepening more than >reducing depth at the root though. > >I also think I'm going to go to automatically failing low if the first move >fails low. > >anthony Reducing root depth works for me, see my post to DB. Loops are avoided by limiting the reduction routine per search (I allow max two, and the second reduces less).
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.