Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Blathy problem - mate in 16

Author: Uri Blass

Date: 04:28:01 04/19/05

Go up one level in this thread


On April 19, 2005 at 05:21:30, Ross Boyd wrote:

>On April 18, 2005 at 22:55:31, Uri Blass wrote:
>
>>On April 18, 2005 at 22:41:37, Uri Blass wrote:
>>
>>>On April 18, 2005 at 22:29:09, Uri Blass wrote:
>>>
>>>>On April 18, 2005 at 21:32:59, Jeremiah Penery wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On April 18, 2005 at 07:24:11, Uri Blass wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>part of the problem is check extensions and part of the problem is probably
>>>>>>pruning based on evaluation together with other factors that I should improve.
>>>>>
>>>>>Why should check extensions make any difference in this position?  Neither side
>>>>>should be giving any checks.
>>>>
>>>>The problem is that most of the search time is not on the right line but in what
>>>>happens after queen promotion.
>>>>
>>>>Movei cannot find the knight promotion in a reasonable time(I did not try more
>>>>than 30 minutes on a fast PC) but almost all the search time is on queen
>>>>promotion.
>>>>
>>>>After performing the knight promotion finding the mate is easy for movei.
>>>>
>>>>Uri
>>>
>>>Note that check extensions was only a thought and I am not sure that it is the
>>>problem.
>>>
>>>single reply extensions after queen promotion may be a bigger problem(single
>>>reply extensions are done also after a knight promotion but they do not help
>>>much because depth reductions that is not null move pruning are also used and
>>>probably they are used more after knight promotion).
>>>
>>>Uri
>>
>>Checking show that you are right that check extensions are not the problem and
>>single reply extension is the problem that prevent movei to go deep because
>>after queen promotion there are a lot of moves that force single reply that are
>>not checks.
>>
>>Uri
>
>:-)
>
>That sounds like the cause of the problem. The tree would explode. Do you limit
>single replies in any way? In 99% of positions its not going to be a problem
>anyway, so no need to fix it. Maybe put a hard limit of 4 non-check extensions
>or whatever works best.
>
>Ross

I limit them but the limit is not based on their number but based on evaluation
and if the side that force the single reply is clearly winning I do not extend.

Uri



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.