Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Lies.. Damn Lies & Statistics!

Author: chandler yergin

Date: 18:09:16 01/12/05

Go up one level in this thread


On January 12, 2005 at 21:02:01, Dann Corbit wrote:

>On January 12, 2005 at 20:57:40, chandler yergin wrote:
>
>>On January 12, 2005 at 20:33:25, Dann Corbit wrote:
>>
>>>On January 12, 2005 at 20:25:24, Uri Blass wrote:
>>>
>>>>On January 12, 2005 at 19:56:25, Dann Corbit wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On January 12, 2005 at 19:37:29, Steve Maughan wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>Dann,
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Things that seem impossible quickly become possible.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>I recon about 300 years before a computer will solve chess.  This assumes
>>>>>>
>>>>>>1) 10^120 possible positions
>>>>>
>>>>>This is far, far too large.  Chess positions have been encoded in 162 bits,
>>>>>which puts an absolute upper limit at 10^58 (and it is probably much less than
>>>>>that).
>>>>>
>>>>>>2) Alpha-beta cutting this down to 10^60 sensible positions
>>>>>
>>>>>The incorrect first assumption renders this and all following assumtions as
>>>>>moot.
>>>>
>>>>The second assumption is also not correct.
>>>>
>>>>By the same logic alphabeta can cut less than 2^30 positions in KRB vs KR to
>>>>2^15 positions but it does not happen and solving some KRB vs KR position with
>>>>no KRB vs KR tablebases is not something that you need 2^15 nodes for it.
>>>
>>>No.  The second assumption would be true if the first was true.  This was
>>>formally PROVEN by Donald Knuth.  In a perfectly ordered alpha-beta solution
>>>tree, the number of nodes is proportional to the square root of the nodes in the
>>>full tree.
>>>
>>>If there were 10^120 in the full tree, then about 10^60 would be in the solution
>>>tree.
>>>
>>>It can be less than that.
>>
>>It "Can't be LESS than that!
>>
>> But it cannot be more.
>>
>>
>>It Certainly CAN!
>>
>>In any TREE.. the TREE ONLY represents "What HAS Been PLayed."
>>REFUTE THAT!
>
>You do not have to solve every game.  Only every position.  Look at the two
>chess games that I posted.  The end position for both was identical.  In fact,
>despite the many moves, there are only a very few positions that are distinct.
>For each of those positions, if you know the best move, you do not care how you
>got there.
>

How do you now the "Best Move" until you have calculated them ALL?

Hmmm?


>>Can't HUH?
>
>It's trivial.
>
>>Give it up!



This page took 0.02 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.