Author: Heiner Marxen
Date: 09:20:13 01/06/05
Go up one level in this thread
On January 05, 2005 at 16:15:22, F. Huber wrote: >On January 05, 2005 at 14:02:58, Richard Pijl wrote: > >>On January 05, 2005 at 13:47:09, Kurt Utzinger wrote: >> >>>Much too easy for any chess program I think. Or can you find >>>a modern engine being unable to solve this within 0 to some seconds? >>>Kurt >> >>I only tried a few, and all were able to solve it in 1 second or less on my >>machine. >>Now a question for the mate-solvers: Is this a mate in 20, or can a faster mate >>be found? >>Richard. > >Hi Richard, > >I´ve tried it now in brute-force mode with ´Gustav 3.0´ up to depth 13, but >with a branching factor of about 2.5 it would take too long, if it´s really >a mate in 20 (so at least it´s above 13). >Chest (also in brute force) is much slower for this position ... > >Of course all this is _without_ any EGTBs, since both programs don´t support >them - although: Heiner Marxens private development version of Chest seems to >already have implemented it, so maybe Heiner could try this problem. Hello Franz, I've started it on my Athlon 1500+ with all 3&4 piece TBs, and very few 5-piece TBs. Depth 12 needs a minute and shows a factor around 3 between depths, so I'm not sure this has any hope. Which 5-piece tables would be most useful here? I could try to get some more... [depth 13: 244 secs, factor 3.79... :-( ] >Regards, >Franz. Cheers, Heiner
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.