Author: F. Huber
Date: 04:39:59 03/31/05
Go up one level in this thread
On March 31, 2005 at 06:52:11, Martin Slowik wrote: >Well, of course a tad provocative. :)) >In general the answer might be negative... > >OK, but it's true at least if you compare its analysis to R30's solution on a >special mate level: > >J. Kohtz, C.Kockelkorn, Palamède, 1865. >Mate in 5. > >[d]8/8/2B1N3/3rp3/4k2K/7Q/2r3Pn/1b1N4 w - - 0 1 > >Shredder is not able to give the correct answer on the infinite level on my >machine within a reasonable time frame (Is there a special mate solving level? I >haven't found any). After showing him the first moves and going back, he agrees >and announces mate in 5. A sort of revenge :)), when the programs show me the >mates in three I missed in my games... > >Tasc R30 needs 48 sec on the #5 level. > >Does your favourite program find the correct line without your help? > >Wood Pusher Regards, >Martin > >P.S. ChestUCI v3.9 (Search Mode: Automatic) needs 46 sec on my computer (Athlon >1900+). Not that much faster. Hi Martin, what a crazy idea to use the ´Automatic´ mode for a #5! ;-) The _hardest_ #5 that I have in my mate-collection takes Chest no longer than 10 sec in ´brute force´- mode on my _very_ slow Celeron/400 - and so also this mate is solved _much_ faster than your 46 sec: ChestUCI Ver.4.0: CPU: Celeron 400MHz FEN: 8/8/2B1N3/3rp3/4k2K/7Q/2r3Pn/1b1N4 w - - Search for Mate in 10 ... (Hash=49MB) 5 00:02 56.759 29.561 +M5 1.Kh5 Search completed ... (Time=2.41s) Mate in 5 found ! (00:02) 1.Kh5 Ba2 2.Kh6 Bb3 3.Kh7 Bc4 4.Kh8 Nf3 5.Qh7# 1 Solution (Mate in 5) So one conclusion is: even if using ChestUCI, ´thinking first´ would be not a bad idea! ;-) Regards, Franz.
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.