Author: blass uri
Date: 22:34:54 07/11/99
Go up one level in this thread
On July 12, 1999 at 01:05:23, blass uri wrote: > >On July 11, 1999 at 22:26:34, Les Fernandez wrote: > >>On July 11, 1999 at 13:09:56, blass uri wrote: >>Hello Blass, >> >>Not to long ago several people out here including Dann Corbit began a similar >>study, you might have missed the post. > >I did not miss the post but they did not prove a good upper bound to the number >of positions. >My upper bound is based on counting positions and not on representing positions >by bits. > >I count for every material structure the number of legal positions and add the >numbers. > >Most of my material structures are impossible and I used this to reduce the >bounf and my new program proves that the number is less then >7.67673099169859567*(10^41) if I have no mistake > >Unfortunately I do not know how to represent exact big numbers and I need more >then 256 bits for big numbers like 64!(512 are enough) > >Uri I have a mistake about this number. I used the inequality that the number of promoted white pawns is at most twice the number of captured black pieces and this inequality is not correct(It is correct if white pieces are not captured but I ignored the fact that white can get passed pawns also because of the fact that white pieces are captured by black pawns). 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.