Author: Alessandro Scotti
Date: 08:00:00 09/08/04
Go up one level in this thread
On September 08, 2004 at 08:49:33, David Dahlem wrote: >I tried several of the mate in 33 positions using my table method, and in all >cases, it was able to mate against tablebases within the 50 move rule, usually >in 46-48 moves. I have tried several of them too but then I found a "mate in 30" position that broke the algo. That's why I don't feel confident enough with "manual" tests. A position that is a longer mate for ETGB may not be the most difficult for an algorithm and fixing it even with a small change invalidates all previous tests. Besides, within the path to mate, the losing kings has often different moves to make and if we don't try them all we're just testing one single path. (If OTOH we test all branches then eventually we should also come to the "mate in 30" position above... correct?) That's why I was thinking of automatic tuning/testing... or using ETGBs, which at this point would be like admitting defeat though...
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.