Author: Bruce Moreland
Date: 09:02:07 10/15/99
Go up one level in this thread
On October 15, 1999 at 10:05:10, Jeremiah Penery wrote: >On October 15, 1999 at 03:25:00, Shep wrote: > >>On October 14, 1999 at 15:14:28, Jeremiah Penery wrote: >> >> >>>Most programs can find at least a couple of them (#11, maybe #10, some may find >>>#3, but probably for 'positional' reasons. #1 and #5 are possible, but a bit >>>more difficult, and would probably take longer.) in reasonable time. Maybe even >>>in 10 minutes. >> >>Many programs find #1 in under 10 minutes. Chessmaster 5555 finds #2 in under 6 >>hours on a P6-233 (but I don't know how much under) with a correct score. > >When these programs find #1, do they choose Nxh6 only for a very small >positional reason (instead of choosing Qd4 or some other move)? Do they >actually find that this move is winning? I think the key move to position #1 is >after 1. Nxh6 c3, and the move is 2. Nf5. IMO, this position isn't solved >unless A) 2. Nf5 is found and B) a winning score is returned for white. >Otherwise, the engine will play 1. Nxh6 and still lose, therefore defeating the >purpose of finding the 'brilliant' move. > >That's a nice result from CM5555 on position #2. I know DT2 solved this one in >a couple minutes, with correct score, but we can hardly expect to match their >results for this test. :) > >Jeremiah I think there are several programs that get Nolot 2 in a few minutes. bruce
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.