Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Computational question for mathematicians, philosophers & computer-geeks

Author: Dieter Buerssner

Date: 05:32:47 03/03/05

Go up one level in this thread


I can beat it by almost 3 bits rather easily. Using your idea of encoding the
castling rights in the K square, and reasoning given in other messages of this
thread.

First the positions without ep:

2*15^8*23^2*22^2*50*51*42!/(32!*2^4) =
1,116,831,790,908,041,696,550,562,500,000,000 = ~1.12e33

And now the positions with ep. We define 14 ep states. For example for white to
move state 1 could mean. wPa5, bPb5, state 2 wPb5, bPa5, state 3 wPb5, bPc5,
etc. So 2 pawns are already set, by one of the 14 states. The two other pawns on
these 2 files have 2*6 possibilities. So the pawn part of the above formula
becomes 14*2*6*15^6. Now the 16 pawns occupy practically 18 squares (because one
pawn must have just done a double step, making 2 additional squares unavailable
for the other men). This now gives

2*15^6*14*2*6*22^2*21^2*48*49*40!/(30!*2^4)
369,379,773,635,426,085,230,899,200,000,000 = ~3.7e32

Adding both numbers together we get 1.49e33 = ~2^110.195

One can of course still reduce this number. For example, the scheme will count
positions with both Ks on neighboring squares. With some effort, this could be
avoided at least for parts of the positions. Perhaps also something like Eugene
Nalimov's idea for getting rid of unblockable checks could be used in a more
complicated enumeration scheme. Getting down to 100 bits looks difficult,
however. One could try some sort of Monte Carlo integration, to estimate the
number of legal positions. However this might not be easy. Practically, one
could only look at every 1e20th position or so.

Regards,
Dieter

PS. I think, I was too fast, to call my first idea for encoding the ep-square
wrong.



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.