Zugzwang Test Suite ZPTS by Robert Allgeuer

[carldaman]

I took my GPS in car so he guides me from point A to point B. If it makes me go through xyz points, I throw it out the window.

I'd vote for the latter

Regards,
CL

[bob]

I took my GPS in car so he guides me from point A to point B. If it makes me go through xyz points, I throw it out the window.

No rule in chess says "you must play the shortest possible mate." Hence, not all engines try to do that. The first mate found is more than good enough.

[phenri]

I took my GPS in car so he guides me from point A to point B. If it makes me go through xyz points, I throw it out the window.

No rule in chess says "you must play the shortest possible mate." Hence, not all engines try to do that. The first mate found is more than good enough.

There are no rules in effect, it's just a matter of common sense.
An engine that shows lazy in his search for checkmate, it leaves me very great doubts in his choice of moves in the rest of the game. If you can not understand it ...

[BBauer]

What do you mean by common sense?
Humans often choose a longer way to win simply because its easier to play.
For me mate in 10 is as good as mate in 5.
I see a problem when the best move is never found.
This happens often in stockfish even so stockfish is very strong.
Perhaps the problem will remain for a long time.
Thats why modifications like sting come up.
Kind regards
Bernhard

[zullil]

Marco's conclusions are not orrect.
He claims that the verification search does not change ELO level
but there is zero evidence for it.

passing twice SPRT(-4,0) only means no significant regression by removing verification search and there is no similiar proof that adding verification search does not reduce the elo.

In order to have a similiar proof we need to run SPRT(0,4) twice and get negative result twice both at 15+0.05 and 60+0.05 when one positive result stop the test and means removing verification search.

Why not just include a UCI "check" option called "Disable Verification Search"? But then again, there would be loud arguments about whether "true" or "false" should be the default.

[phenri]

What do you mean by common sense?
Humans often choose a longer way to win simply because its easier to play.
For me mate in 10 is as good as mate in 5.
I see a problem when the best move is never found.
This happens often in stockfish even so stockfish is very strong.
Perhaps the problem will remain for a long time.
Thats why modifications like sting come up.
Kind regards
Bernhard

the research of optimum or of what goes up to it.
Otherwise, I agree.

[Vinvin]

I took my GPS in car so he guides me from point A to point B. If it makes me go through xyz points, I throw it out the window.

When you got a mate score you already done 99% of the way

[Uri Blass]

I took my GPS in car so he guides me from point A to point B. If it makes me go through xyz points, I throw it out the window.

Of course but the your target is not only to get from point A to point B but to do it fast.

When the target is to get higher chess rating it is unimportant if you win faster or slower.

[phenri]

I took my GPS in car so he guides me from point A to point B. If it makes me go through xyz points, I throw it out the window.

Of course but the your target is not only to get from point A to point B but to do it fast.

When the target is to get higher chess rating it is unimportant if you win faster or slower.

You are mistaken ... The characteristic of a strong player or a strong engine is that most moves are more accurate, are rating increases, and vice versa. I am surprised to read this from you.

The sentence on the GPS was just a metaphor, as I will say this: "Over the tool is accurate, more efficient you are."

Now we do not go astray please, this thread is for discussions about the Zugzwang and the difficulty of engines in certain positions and not the checkmate in x or y number of moves started by someone.

[Uri Blass]

I took my GPS in car so he guides me from point A to point B. If it makes me go through xyz points, I throw it out the window.

Of course but the your target is not only to get from point A to point B but to do it fast.

When the target is to get higher chess rating it is unimportant if you win faster or slower.

You are mistaken ... The characteristic of a strong player or a strong engine is that most moves are more accurate, are rating increases, and vice versa. I am surprised to read this from you.

The sentence on the GPS was just a metaphor, as I will say this: "Over the tool is accurate, more efficient you are."

Now we do not go astray please, this thread is for discussions about the Zugzwang and the difficulty of engines in certain positions and not the checkmate in x or y number of moves started by someone.

An engine can have pruning rules that prevent it to find the best move in some winning positions with no reduction in playing strength.

The engine already know that the evaluation after search is more than 50 pawns so it does not search positions with static evaluation of 1 pawn even if they may lead to faster mate because the big difference between target evaluation and static evaluation leads to pruning.

This pruning usually help in normal game because the engine prune positions when it is 2 queen down when it evaluates based on search that the position is drawn(this pruning usually save time and the example when a player with a single pawn can beat a player with a queen and many pieces and pawns is very rare in games) .