Hi,
Shredder 9 is has been out for quite some month now, but nowhere have I seen a report on the actual gain obtained, in endgames, with the use of BitBases added to Nalimov TableBases.
I assume that the usual setting is to have both the 5-man BitBases (400 MB in memory) and the 5-man TableBases (7+ GB on disk + cache).
I personally cannot test that, because I only have 512 MB on my machine (so I didn't even buy Shredder 10 ... but I have Shredder 9)
Do you have experience with Shredder 10 BitBases or have-you seen a report on their use?
(a few years ago, I experimented with Yace and 4-man BitBases, but at 4-man level, they did not seem then to bring much...)
Who can report on BitBases efficiency in Shredder 10?
-
- Posts: 489
- Joined: Sat Jan 21, 2006 10:43 am
- Sign-up code: 10159
- Location: Reading, UK
- Contact:
Shredderbase contribution ...
Stefan M-K kindly provided me with an upgrade to SHREDDER10. The analysis window shows the counts of accesses to Shredderbases (SB) and to Endgame Tables (TB).
I am assuming, rightly or wrongly, that SB/TB is the factor of speed-up as it shows that TB rather than SB accesses to the EGTs needed to be made.
The contribution, (SB/TB)-1, increases with the scarcity of value-retaining moves. So it will be zero for KQK and KRK but maybe good for KQPKQ.
g
I am assuming, rightly or wrongly, that SB/TB is the factor of speed-up as it shows that TB rather than SB accesses to the EGTs needed to be made.
The contribution, (SB/TB)-1, increases with the scarcity of value-retaining moves. So it will be zero for KQK and KRK but maybe good for KQPKQ.
g
Re: Shredderbase contribution ...
But concretely, has there been results reported for endgame position analysis (if not games starting with endgame suites...)?guyhaw wrote:Stefan M-K kindly provided me with an upgrade to SHREDDER10. The analysis window shows the counts of accesses to Shredderbases (SB) and to Endgame Tables (TB).
I am assuming, rightly or wrongly, that SB/TB is the factor of speed-up as it shows that TB rather than SB accesses to the EGTs needed to be made.
The contribution, (SB/TB)-1, increases with the scarcity of value-retaining moves. So it will be zero for KQK and KRK but maybe good for KQPKQ.
g
-
- Posts: 489
- Joined: Sat Jan 21, 2006 10:43 am
- Sign-up code: 10159
- Location: Reading, UK
- Contact:
"Position Analysis"?
I'm not sure what you mean about "results for position analysis".
Sh'bases just indicate win/draw/loss and are assumed to be correct for that: they don't say whether a position is closer or further from a win. But they do filter out those moves that don't preserve current theoretical value. They are a 'speed up' rather than a better form of analysis.
g
Sh'bases just indicate win/draw/loss and are assumed to be correct for that: they don't say whether a position is closer or further from a win. But they do filter out those moves that don't preserve current theoretical value. They are a 'speed up' rather than a better form of analysis.
g
-
- Posts: 489
- Joined: Sat Jan 21, 2006 10:43 am
- Sign-up code: 10159
- Location: Reading, UK
- Contact:
An observation re Shredderbases
I happen to be looking at a position where I see "TB 13,085 SB 1,066,774" That means that the SBs have been useful to determine that a position was won/lost (in which case, perhaps, the line could be discounted as non-optimal) or drawn (in which case the TBs do not need to be consulted).
I had not realised the 'line termination' role that a definitive 0/1 verdict might bring as a benefit. These are probably lines with a lot of captures which are not to the benefit of one or other side.
g
I had not realised the 'line termination' role that a definitive 0/1 verdict might bring as a benefit. These are probably lines with a lot of captures which are not to the benefit of one or other side.
g
Re: "Position Analysis"?
Precisely, given an end-game position (say 10 to 7-man), if you analyse with tablebases alone you get wild disk accesses, knodes/sec go down and you get THE solution (supposing there is one...) say in 24 minutes.guyhaw wrote:I'm not sure what you mean about "results for position analysis".
Sh'bases just indicate win/draw/loss and are assumed to be correct for that: they don't say whether a position is closer or further from a win. But they do filter out those moves that don't preserve current theoretical value. They are a 'speed up' rather than a better form of analysis.
g
Now you add access to the Bitbases in RAM (Shredderbases, here ), what happens to the knodes/sec and the solution time?
Obviously this is very much position dependent!
But I was just wondering if somebody has actually experimented.