Author: Eelco de Groot
Date: 12:06:13 01/07/06
Go up one level in this thread
On January 06, 2006 at 21:48:13, Eelco de Groot wrote: >On January 06, 2006 at 12:01:46, Eelco de Groot wrote: > >>On January 06, 2006 at 10:54:27, Eelco de Groot wrote: >> >>>In CSS-Forum Christoph Fieberg reports results with Rybka on Swiss Test 2 at a >>>long time control: >>> >>>http://f23.parsimony.net/forum50826/messages/139718.htm >>> >>>Rybka can solve 60 out of 64! Not bad. The four remaining positions 7, 12, 40 >>>and 49 are maybe not clear, I intend to test them a little more. In Position 7 >>>the move to avoid Bxc3 seems to lose but other moves also get a drop in score >>>over time. It is easier to post a diagram here, I thought I'd post some results >>>here first. First number 7, rest will maybe follow later. I did a four best >>>moves analysis with Gambit Fruit 1.0 Beta 4bx, Bxc3+ comes in second but Be7 not >>>much better: >>> >>>am Bxc3+; hmvc 0; fmvc 19; c0 "?"; id "SwissTest2_Nr.07 - Aristarch45-List512"; >>> >>>[D] r1bq1rk1/p4pp1/5n1p/n2pNP2/1bpP3B/2N1PQ2/1PB3PP/2R1K2R b K - 0 1 >>> >>>01:31:01.0 -1,65 18 1845764238 Be7 Bxf6 Bxf6 Nxd5 Bxe5 dxe5 Bb7 Rd1 Qh4+ g3 Qh3 >>>Qe4 Kh8 e6 Rfe8 Kf2 Rab8 f6 g6 e7 Bc6 Qe5 >>>01:31:01.0 -1,75 18 2879197170 Bxc3+ bxc3 Nb3 Rd1 Qb6 O-O Rd8 Qg3 Nh5 Qh3 Nf6 >>>Rb1 Rb8 Qg3 Nh5 Qf3 Nf6 Kh1 Qd6 Qg3 >>>01:31:01.0 -1,79 18 2139520513 Qb6 O-O Bxc3 bxc3 Nb3 Rcd1 Bb7 Rb1 Ba6 Qg3 Bc8 e4 >>>Nxd4 cxd4 Qxd4+ Kh1 Nh5 Qg4 Qxe5 Qxh5 dxe4 >>>01:31:01.0 -1,89 18 3337609714 Qd6 O-O Bxc3 bxc3 Nb3 Rcd1 Bb7 Nxc4 dxc4 Qxb7 Qd5 >>>Qa6 Rfb8 Rf4 Rb6 Qa4 Kh8 e4 Qd6 e5 >>> >>>Athlon 2009 MHz, 200 MB HT >>> >> >>At nineteen ply, Bxc3+ is in first again! So this position seems unclear for an >>an "avoid move" test. Rybka probably chose the right move afer all. On shorter >>timecontrols, -the test is intended for a one minute per move test, at least >>that is how I used it-, which move gives best chances may be not so clear. But >>that does not make this the best possible testmove. >> >>03:11:01.6 -1,70 19 1070528192 Bxc3+ bxc3 Nb3 Rd1 Qb6 O-O Rd8 Qg3 Nh5 Qh3 Nf6 >>Rb1 Rb8 Qg3 Ba6 e4 dxe4 Rfe1 Kf8 Bxe4 Rxd4 cxd4 Qxd4+ Kh1 Nxe4 >>03:11:01.6 -1,79 19 1585142163 Be7 Bxf6 Bxf6 Nxd5 Bxe5 dxe5 Bb7 Rd1 Qh4+ g3 Qh3 >>Qe4 Kh8 e6 Rfe8 f6 g6 e7 Nb3 Qxc4 Qg2 Rf1 Ba6 >>03:11:01.7 -1,87 19 2163812257 Qb6 O-O Bxc3 bxc3 Nb3 Rcd1 Rb8 Rf2 Rd8 Qf4 Re8 e4 >>Bb7 exd5 Bxd5 Bxf6 Qxf6 Nd7 Qd8 Nxb8 Qxb8 Qxb8 Rxb8 f6 g6 >>03:11:01.7 -1,98 19 2826541678 Qd6 O-O Bxc3 bxc3 Rb8 Bxf6 Qxf6 Qxd5 Nb3 Rce1 Bb7 >>Qd7 Rfc8 Qa4 Bc6 Qa3 Rb7 Nxc4 Bd5 Bxb3 Bxc4 Bxc4 Rxc4 > >The computer was still running, and the order of the four moves has changed >again. Although it not so clear anymore which move is best, the most interesting >thing to see in this position is maybe that variability in evaluations can still >upset the moveorder in deep searches, and this variability in this case does not >seem to diminish with greater depth. To investigate how much of this could be >"random noise" as in Chrilly Donninger's theory, maybe you could repeat the >experiment with other programs and see if the same moves have similar scores at >same depths. It can differ per program of course. The advantage of using >multivariation analysis is that you can get four or more PVs from essentially a >single position so variability in position does not play such a big role. Here >lies some subject material for an IGCA paper maybe? > >11:14:36.0 -1,69 21 4185487258 Be7 Bxf6 Bxf6 Nxd5 Rb8 Nxf6+ Qxf6 Rb1 Qd6 O-O f6 >Ng6 Re8 Rfd1 Nb3 Be4 Rb5 Kh1 Bd7 g4 Kh7 Qg2 Rb4 Nf4 >11:14:36.0 -1,85 20 310254083 Kh8 Ng4 Be7 Bxf6 Bxf6 Nxf6 gxf6 Qxd5 Rb8 Rb1 Bb7 >Qxd8 Rfxd8 Kf2 Nc6 b3 Nb4 Be4 Ba6 bxc4 Bxc4 Rhc1 Kg7 Ra1 Rd7 >11:14:36.0 -1,97 20 1299140175 Qb6 O-O Bxc3 bxc3 Nb3 Rcd1 Rd8 Qg3 Bb7 Rb1 Qd6 >Bxb3 cxb3 Bxf6 Qxf6 Rxb3 Bc8 Qg4 Ba6 Ra1 Bc8 e4 dxe4 >11:14:36.0 -2,00 20 1326699232 Bxc3+ bxc3 Nb3 Rd1 Qb6 O-O Rd8 Qg3 Nh5 Qh3 Nf6 >Ng4 Nxg4 Bxd8 Qxd8 Qxg4 Qg5 Qxg5 hxg5 e4 Bb7 exd5 Bxd5 Rde1 Rb8 Computer was still running, this is 21 plies: 21:26:55.6 -1,69 21 4185487258 Be7 Bxf6 Bxf6 Nxd5 Rb8 Nxf6+ Qxf6 Rb1 Qd6 O-O f6 Ng6 Re8 Rfd1 Nb3 Be4 Rb5 Kh1 Bd7 g4 Kh7 Qg2 Rb4 Nf4 21:26:55.7 -1,80 21 1759254753 Qd6 O-O Bxc3 bxc3 Nb3 Rcd1 Bb7 Nxc4 dxc4 Qxb7 Nd5 Bg3 Qd8 Bxb3 cxb3 Rd3 Re8 Qxb3 Nxe3 Rf3 Qd5 Qxd5 Nxd5 c4 Nf6 21:26:55.7 -1,88 21 3973269201 Qb6 O-O Bxc3 bxc3 Nb3 Rcd1 Rd8 Kh1 Qa6 Rg1 Re8 Bxf6 Qxf6 e4 dxe4 Bxe4 Rb8 Rgf1 Na5 Bd5 Re7 Qh5 Rb5 Be4 21:26:55.7 -1,96 21 2466462021 Bxc3+ bxc3 Nb3 Rd1 Qb6 O-O Bb7 Rb1 Ba6 Qg3 Rad8 Ng4 Nxg4 Bxd8 Qxd8 Qxg4 Qg5 Qe2 Qf6 e4 Nxd4 cxd4 c3 Qe3 Bxf1 Rxf1 I think I'll stop here, in first results of 22 ply Qb6 and Qd6 seem to trade places again: 29:30:36.1 -1,66 22 3781325646 Be7 Bxf6 Bxf6 Nxd5 Rb8 Nxf6+ Qxf6 Rb1 Qd6 O-O f6 Ng6 Re8 Rfd1 Nc6 Kh1 Ne7 Nh4 Kh8 e4 Rb4 Qa3 Ba6 Nf3 Reb8 ....rest not certain.... 29:30:36.1 -1,99 22 3223804454 Qb6 O-O Bxc3 bxc3 Nb3 Rcd1 Bb7 Rb1 Ba6 Qg3 Rfe8 Bxb3 cxb3 Rxb3 Qd6 Bxf6 Qxf6 Ra1 Bc8 Rb5 Rd8 Rf1 Ba6 Ng4 Qd6 28:22:45.9 -2,00 22 680833798 Qd6 O-O Bxc3 bxc3 Nb3 Rcd1 Rb8 Bxf6 Qxf6 Qxd5 Bb7 Qxc4 Ba6 Qa4 Bxf1 Rxf1 Nc5 Qxa7 Rfc8 Qa2 Re8 Qd5 Rb2 Qxc5 Rxc2 Eelco
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.