[ List Latest Comments Only For Pages | Games | Rated Pages | Rated Games | Subjects of Discussion ]
Comments/Ratings for a Single Item
Thanks for the very interesting post. I know that hash tables (in chess programs, normally called a Transposition Table) can lead to the program confusing positions, but I have never heard of a high-profile case of this actually happening. Here's how the transposition table works... There are different sequences of moves that can lead to the same board position, and the program doesn't what to re-consider a position it has already considered, so it keeps a look-up table of positions it has already considered. The look-up table is normally indexed by a 64-bit value (the locations of all the pieces on the board are 'boiled down' into a 64-bit number.) Since there are more than 2^64 possible board positions, some different positions can equate to the same key value. This leads to mis-evaluation of the situation. The chances against this happening, however, are astronomical! One-in-a-million is actually quite an understatement - it is really more like one-in-2^64 (assuming Shreader isn't programmed in some really silly way, and I'm assuming it isn't.) Guess it had to happen sooner or later! :) Transposition tables also lead to other problems. For one thing, the table entry only tells you about the position, not how you got there. This is a problem when 3-time repetition is involved. A position can look really good the first time you encounter it, but the next time you encounter it, your pre-determined response may actually lead to a 3-time repetition, and therefore a draw! These are known problems. Absolutely every commercial chess program has bugs. Bugs that the programmers are well aware of. But, the very occasional problem with a transposition table is negligable compared to the benefit, so they use them anyway...
Computer super-programs can blunder!. This is taken from Chessbase: After six rounds of the Mercosur Cup in Argentina: Lafuente,P (2435) - SHREDDER [The super-program, estimated close to 2800] Mercosur Cup Vicente Lopez ARG (3), 16.07.2005 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.Qc2 d6 5.Nf3 Nbd7 6.Bd2 0-0 7.a3 Bxc3 8.Bxc3 Qe7 9.e3 b6 10.Be2 Bb7 11.0-0 Ne4 12.Nd2 Nxc3 13.Qxc3 c5 14.Bf3 Nf6 15.b4 Rac8 16.dxc5 dxc5 17.b5 Rcd8 18.Rad1 Rd6 19.Bxb7. Lafuente has just captured a black bishop on b7, after which White must recapture. But Shredder plays the unaccountable: 19...Rfd8?? The official bulletin says it was definitely not a mouse slip or any other kind of operator error, but that Shredder thought for over three minutes, initially analysing 19...Qxb7 to a depth of 20 ply but then switching to the move it ultimately played. The evaluation showed a slight advantage for Black. Only after the next move the value suddenly dropped to show a decisive advantage for White. Afterwards the organisers tested the critical position again with Shredder and diagnosed the problem as a 'one in a million' error in the hash tables. (!!!). Lafuente won the game without problems, but Shredder won the Tournament.
3 comments displayed
Permalink to the exact comments currently displayed.