Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: A doubt about EGTB statistics

Author: Eugene Nalimov

Date: 09:31:13 09/24/99

Go up one level in this thread


Yes, I prefer to ignore extra symmetry when both kings are on the same diagonal.
IMHO saving is not worth extra work. Also, for the cases that are more
complicated than KXK, I am sure my indexing schema is doing the better job.

Eugene

On September 24, 1999 at 08:55:43, Guido wrote:

>Before all, I would thank Mr. Nalimov for the program tbgen, that I found very
>fast and efficient.
>
>I have developed (and continue to debug) a similar program for generating
>tablebases. But the statistics I found are slightly different from the
>correspondent statistics in tbgen.
>
>To explain the problem, let us consider the simple case of KQK. I rewrite here
>the file KQK.TBS  with at right the values obtained by my program:
>
>                          tbgen       my program
>
>wtm: Mate in  10:             1               1
>wtm: Mate in   9:           375             335
>wtm: Mate in   8:          1936            1877
>wtm: Mate in   7:          4102            4016
>wtm: Mate in   6:          4101            4010
>wtm: Mate in   5:          3313            3273
>wtm: Mate in   4:          2546            2499
>wtm: Mate in   3:          1157            1135
>wtm: Mate in   2:           649             629
>wtm: Mate in   1:           312             306
>wtm: Broken positions:     7137    >  my index algorithm is not so good :-)
>btm: Lost in   0:            46              46
>btm: Lost in   1:           175             169
>btm: Lost in   2:           397             372
>btm: Lost in   3:           949             936
>btm: Lost in   4:          1823            1773
>btm: Lost in   5:          3230            3190
>btm: Lost in   6:          5077            4997
>btm: Lost in   7:          6883            6769
>btm: Lost in   8:          5603            5483
>btm: Lost in   9:          1500            1417
>btm: Lost in  10:             8               8
>btm: Draws:                2953            2896
>
>As KQK.NBW (white moves) and KQK.NBB (black moves) occupy respectively 25,629
>bytes and 28,644 bytes, we have that the correct number of different positions
>of the two endings are:
>
>KQK.NBW      25,629 - 7,137  =  18,492   my program gives a total of 18,081
>KQK.NBB      28,644 -     0  =  28,644   my program gives a total of 28,056
>
>Now, while computation of correct KQK.NBW positions is not easy because we have
>to eliminate checking situations, for KQK.NBB this problem doesn't arise and I
>try here to compute the positions.
>
>K(white)  has 10 different positions.
>
>K(white) + K(black) has 462 different positions as I report here from a past
>thread:
>
>  1 x 4    =   1 x 33    =    33                white king in a1
>  3 x 6    =   3 x 58    =   174                white king in b1, c1, d1
>  3 x 9    =   3 x 55    =   165                white king in c2, d2, d3
>  3 x 9    =   3 x 30    =    90                white king in b2, c3, d4
>                       ----------
>Total                        462 positions
>
>Now we have to add the white queen. If the queen can be put in all the remaining
>positions not occupied by kings, we obtain:
>
>462 * 62 =  28,644  exactly the number given by tbgen.
>
>But this is true only if the the two kings are not both on the diagonal a1-h8.
>In these cases the squares available for the queen would be only 34, because the
>other squares generate positions symmetrically equivalent. How many are these
>situations?
>
>For white king in a1         6     (black king in c3, d4, e5, f6, g7, h8)
>For white king in b2         5     (black king in d4, e5, f6, g7, h8)
>For white king in c3         5     (black king in a1, e5, f6, g7, h8)
>For white king in d4         5     (black king in a1, b2, f6, g7, h8)
>                          -----
>                 Total      21
>
>Therefore the correct computation for KQK.NBB should be as follows:
>
>(462 - 21) * 62   =   27,342
>      21   * 34   =      714
>                     -------
>          Total       28,056
>
>IMHO the conclusion should be that in this case statistics of  tbgen consider
>28,644 - 28,056 = 588 duplicated positions.
>
>Obviously this fact doesn't not affect the correctness of the tablebases, nor
>the exceptional speed of the program and related algorithms (I am very far from
>such speed).
>
>I found analogous difference for all the other cases (3 & some 4-man endings for
>now), while only KPK and KPPK give identical results.
>
>Best regards
>Guido



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.