What ist nonsense?hgm wrote: ↑Mon Mar 08, 2021 11:31 pmThat is nonsense. If an engine sees +3, it just means it is a minor ahead, but the position is still to complex to recognize it as a draw (which a minor ahead typically is). So it is probably not KBK. There is zero evidence that it could force a checkmate from that position.peter wrote: ↑Mon Mar 08, 2021 10:32 pmGood job of Sting's without doubt too.
Mating score isn't really necessary, if engine obviously "sees" it should work within 50 moves, otherwise 0.00- near eval would arise, and of course the line should show progress, which Sting one's clearly does too. Probably Sting would make the mate <50 in play out too, (question remains, if without black blunders) didn't try it neither, and still, if it's to be seen as a study, the 50 moves don't count at all anyhow.
Yet I think it's the engines' problem as for eval still mainly, "thinking" 50 moves draw to arise before mate.
That Chest gives a #46 line?
http://talkchess.com/forum3/viewtopic.p ... 60#p886360
Reproduced here:
http://talkchess.com/forum3/viewtopic.p ... 91#p886391
And that you can keep such lines in hash (if it's big enough) as DTM<50 with SF at Backward in output too? Already with only 4G hash SF 11 made it back to 8th move with a 150+ eval here:
http://talkchess.com/forum3/viewtopic.p ... 79#p886379
And you saw the illegal position here, did you?
http://talkchess.com/forum3/viewtopic.p ... 02#p886402
And Vincent's Sting had not only +3, it was +110 here, did you see?
http://talkchess.com/forum3/viewtopic.p ... 03#p886403
And what's nonsense in my supposing, that the wrong 0.00- near eval can come from drawing lines within search- horizon without mate "in sight" only?
If it wasn't 50 moves rule, where do you think, 0.00 should come from with this unbalanced material otherwise?