Author: leonid
Date: 08:58:52 11/29/99
Go up one level in this thread
On November 29, 1999 at 09:49:36, Heiner Marxen wrote: >>What I wanted to know is how many variation of "mate solving logic" you have in >>your game. Number of variation can go endlessly. I left, for instance, only >four >>in my logic. Difference in version of the logic consist in the fact that each >>will find at different speed solution. Some logic will find more rapidly the >>response but will find the mate not all the time when it is there. > >I see. I have just one variation: prove shortest mate (or absence of). > >I have some ideas about a mate finder mode, but not yet implemented >anything. Dann Corbit suggested a material evaluation goal to me, >but I'm not yet sure that I like it. Material evaluation sound to me as very strange. I do nothing of this kind. When you look for mate there are no reason to search any material evaluation. You look only if the king can be taken and you stop everything even before doing this. You never goes into the killing of the king, but in Arabic "mate" actually signify "kill". In chess we stop everything before going into the final slaughter. This is done for purely "humanitarian reason". Can you say, if few words, how in general mate is found in the logic, not necessarily your. I have no idea what is the usual way. When I wrote my logic I expected that everybody do almost the same way. After I found that nobody even write it inside of the chess game. You came as the next surprise. Not only you wrote the stand alone mate solving logic but did it a long, long time before me. The next descovery was for me the positions of invitable mate, through your page, that was composed in a stange way like I did. Later I found even few other places that contain similar positions. Leonid > >Heiner Marxen heiner@drb.insel.de http://www.drb.insel.de/~heiner/
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.