|(1) Posted by Hauke Reddmann [Saturday, Nov 3, 2018 13:56]|
Scientific Papers on small endgame strategies
I'm in a Master project and suggested a chess-related theme. In your own
interest, consider to help me a bit as the results (if I get voted up)
might be useful for the community. ;-)
KR/K is the paragon of analysis since Torres built his automaton. From
tablebases over heuristic to neural nets all approaches to strategy
encoding have been tried, even an automatic formal mathematic proof
that a certain strategy works. (That's reassuring if you ever have
that endgame OTB :-)
I'm currently researching other endgames: KLL/K,KLS/K,KQ/K+S,L or R,
etc. pp. (four men only, otherwise the tablebase might overload),
but fairy stuff (I stumbled over the Kotesovec paper) is also OK.
So if you know a particular obscure paper (of course I will google
myself too!) or site, drop me a PM or so.
|(2) Posted by Georgy Evseev [Monday, Nov 5, 2018 12:38]|
|(3) Posted by Hauke Reddmann [Tuesday, Nov 13, 2018 17:12]|
Sounds legit, thx :-)
P.S. I'm astonished nobody on MPF yet came up with this:
Oh my God! They killed Losing Chess! Those bastards!
|(4) Posted by seetharaman kalyan [Wednesday, Nov 14, 2018 04:05]|
Have you read it?
|(5) Posted by Eric Huber [Wednesday, Nov 14, 2018 22:04]|
Have a look at John Beasley's page about Chess Variants http://www.jsbeasley.co.uk/cvariants.htm especially the following:
An apparently complete verdict on the ending with king and triplet leaper against king (December 2014, replacing "A note on the triplet leaper 2,3/2,4/2,5" posted August 2012)
And on the same page http://www.jsbeasley.co.uk/cvariants.htm some "old" news about Losing Chess:
Losing Chess : 1 e3 is a win for White (reporting work by Mark Watkins, October 2016)
Losing Chess : 1 a3 e6 is a win for Black (reporting work by Klaas Steenhuis, October 2015)
A summary of Losing Chess openings knowledge as at 10 October 2016
A first survey of Losing Chess endgame material published up to the end of 1999 (October 2000) and the same scanned, plus some Notes and corrections (August/September 2018)
Three-man pawnless endings in Losing Chess (July 1998 / February 1999) and the same scanned
|(6) Posted by Hauke Reddmann [Friday, Nov 16, 2018 10:22]|
@Eric: You are my hero :-) (Encyclopedia DLed on the spot.)
@Seetharaman: In a broad scientific recherche, reading
the abstract suffices all the time :-) (Details can wait
when you nailed down a concrete theme.)
Couldn't forbear the South Park quote as: think of the
chess kids - their favorite pastime shot down :-)
|(7) Posted by seetharaman kalyan [Saturday, Nov 17, 2018 20:28]; edited by seetharaman kalyan [18-11-17]|
I didnt mean it that way. It was like the rhetoric "Really?" I still cant get over the shock that Losing Chess is dead. A decade ago a group of us friends had so much fun playing it. Of course not being experts we can still play.... but ...
|(8) Posted by Hauke Reddmann [Sunday, Nov 18, 2018 15:39]|
It's not that surprising that Losing Chess went the way of checkers -
a) people have too much computer time :-) and b) the forking ratio is
for obvious reasons much smaller than in chess. So, brute force.
|(9) Posted by seetharaman kalyan [Sunday, Nov 18, 2018 15:45]; edited by seetharaman kalyan [18-11-18]|
Perhaps Losing chess with other fairy conditions might be more difficult to crack for the computers.
No more posts
MatPlus.Net Forum General Scientific Papers on small endgame strategies