Author: David Eppstein
Date: 07:35:29 02/28/00
Go up one level in this thread
On February 28, 2000 at 08:45:32, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On February 28, 2000 at 03:00:24, Gregor Overney wrote: >>How large is KQQKQP? How about KPPKPP? > >First, you can forget kppkpp for a long while. The file will be huge and there >are a _bunch_ of other 6-piece files that have to be completed first. I would think that all of the KxxKyy should be about the same size as each other, and all of the KxxKyz should be about the same size as each other. Maybe if some of the pieces are queens the databases would be smaller due to much more limited king position. So KPPKPP shouldn't be any more huge than some ones you already have. The problem, as Bob says, is that to compute KPPKPP correctly you need every KxyKzw, and most of those really are huge (also to play KPPKPP perfectly you need to keep the other databases rather than throwing them away after computing KPPKPP, but that problem can sometimes be finessed). It might be easier to compute an approximate (i.e. not correct but maybe still useful) KPPKPP database assuming no underpromotions -- but you would still need to work up to it through KQQKQP (should be computable now or soon), KQQKPP (probably computable soon and not very interesting), KQPKQP (big, but you could split it up into pieces according to the pawn files), and KPPKQP.
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.