Author: Randall Shane
Date: 13:27:33 06/30/99
Go up one level in this thread
On June 30, 1999 at 12:53:40, KarinsDad wrote:
>On June 30, 1999 at 09:25:34, Randall Shane wrote:
>
>>Oops.
>>
>>I rechecked my calculations, and it came out to just under 2*166. Gotta work on
>>it some more.
>>
>>Sorry about that.
>
>Not a problem. I thought that you must have either came up with a MAJOR paradigm
>shift to get to 151 bits OR you forgot the promotions since 151 bits seems to be
>the minimum number (at least in my spreadsheet) for all of the pawns still on
>the board.
>
>Too bad it wasn't the paradigm shift since that would have been cool.
>
>KarinsDad :)
Well, I'll keep working -- it's a bit of a paradigm shift, but I'm not sure if I
have the right implementation.
The basic idea (in terms of encoding) was to discard base-2....
Here's what I had for the counting -- :
Define functions :
excess2(x) := {x<2 -> x; x>=2 -> x-2}
excess1(x) := {x<1 -> x; x>=1 -> x-1}
permut(a,x,y) := (a!)/(x!y!(a-x-y)!)
-- number of unique placements of
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.