A new concept about material versus time in computer math

[Father]

June 25, 2010

This is a new concept about material versus time... Usually I have been playing "space versus time"... but this is real new: "Material versus time" as a complement of space versus time... There are some things that computers don’t understand, and these two paradigms are examples about what a computer can not understand....they are going to be very busy with the abstract concept...
Best regards,

Father
Playches.com user

Example:
Stockfish 1.7.1 JA (2 cores): 13.3 plies; 771kN/s AMD Turion(tm) 64 X2 Mobile Technology TL-60 2000MHz


[d]4r3/5rk1/1b1qppp1/1p1p1n1p/p1pP1P1P/P1P1RNP1/1PQ3K1/2B1R3 b - - 0 126[d]

[d]2r2rk1/pp3ppp/1q1bp3/2pp1n2/3P1Pn1/P1PQPNP1/1P1NR2P/R1B3K1 b - - 0 16[d]

[Event "Partida evaluada, 1m + 0s"]
[Site "Sala de máquinas"]
[Date "2010.06.25"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Father"]
[Black "K2"]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "D00"]
[WhiteElo "2012"]
[BlackElo "2507"]
[PlyCount "259"]
[EventDate "2010.06.25"]
[TimeControl "60"]

1. d4 {2} d5 {B 0} 2. e3 {0} Nf6 {B 0} 3. c3 {0} e6 {-0.44/14 2} 4. a3 {1 (Nf3)
} Bd6 {2} 5. f4 {-0.76/15 0 (Nf3)} O-O {2} 6. Nf3 {-0.88/14 0} c5 {5} 7. Bd3 {
-0.72/15 0 (Be2)} Nc6 {-0.76/14 3} 8. O-O {0} Ne7 {-0.60/13 1} 9. Re1 {1 (c4)}
Bd7 {-0.60/13 2} 10. Qe2 {0 (Nbd2)} Qb6 {-0.92/13 3} 11. g3 {2 (Nbd2)} Ba4 {-1.
37/12 4} 12. Bc2 {3 (c4)} Bxc2 {-1.41/12 1} 13. Qxc2 {0} Nf5 {-1.49/13 1} 14.
Qd3 {1 (Qg2)} Ng4 {-1.53/12 1} 15. Re2 {1 (Qe2)} Rac8 {-1.85/12 2} 16. Nbd2 {
3 (Qd1)} c4 {-1.77/12 1} 17. Qb1 {5} Ngxe3 {-1.37/16 0} 18. Nf1 {1 (h3)} Nxf1 {
-1.85/14 1} 19. Kxf1 {0} Be7 {-1.73/14 1} 20. Qc2 {2 (Kg1)} Nd6 {-1.77/13 1}
21. Be3 {1} Qd8 {-1.65/14 1} 22. Rae1 {1 (Kg2)} Rc6 {-1.81/14 1} 23. Bc1 {0
(Kg2)} Rb6 {-1.93/14 1} 24. Kg2 {1 (Be3)} Qe8 {-1.97/14 1} 25. Kh1 {0 (Kg1)}
Qc6 {2} 26. Kg2 {-1.97/15 0} Qd7 {-1.89/15 0} 27. Kg1 {0 (Be3)} Rc8 {1} 28. Kg2
{-1.93/15 0 (Be3)} Ne4 {1} 29. Kg1 {-1.81/14 0 (Nd2)} Qc6 {1} 30. Kg2 {-1.89/
13 0 (Be3)} Qe8 {1} 31. Kg1 {-1.89/14 0 (Nd2)} h5 {1} 32. Kg2 {-1.85/13 0 (Nd2)
} Qd7 {-1.77/12 1} 33. h4 {1 (Nd2)} Bf6 {-2.02/12 1} 34. Kh2 {0 (Nd2)} Qd8 {1}
35. Kg2 {-2.02/12 0} g6 {-1.85/14 1} 36. Kh2 {0 (Be3)} Ra8 {1} 37. Kg2 {-1.89/
12 0} Qc7 {1} 38. Kh2 {-1.85/14 0 (Rf1)} Rc8 {0} 39. Kg2 {-1.93/11 0 (Be3)} Rd8
{0} 40. Kh2 {-1.85/12 0 (Be3)} Rb5 {1} 41. Kg2 {-1.93/11 0} Qb6 {0} 42. Kh2 {
-1.81/13 0 (Ne5)} Qc6 {-1.81/11 0} 43. Kg2 {0} Rb6 {0} 44. Kh2 {-1.77/14 0
(Be3)} Rb8 {0} 45. Kg2 {-1.85/11 0} Re8 {0} 46. Kh2 {-1.77/14 0 (Be3)} Rb5 {0}
47. Kg2 {-1.93/11 0 (Be3)} Qb6 {0} 48. Kh2 {-1.81/13 0 (Ne5)} Rd8 {-1.81/11 0}
49. Kg2 {0} Qc7 {-1.81/15 0} 50. Kh2 {0 (Be3)} Rb6 {0} 51. Kg2 {-1.81/11 0} Qe7
{0} 52. Kh2 {-1.81/13 0 (Be3)} a6 {0} 53. Kg2 {-1.85/10 0 (Be3)} Rc8 {1} 54.
Kh2 {-1.69/12 0 (Be3)} Qd7 {0} 55. Kg2 {-1.89/9 0} a5 {0} 56. Kh2 {-1.69/13 0
(Be3)} Qe7 {0} 57. Kg2 {-1.81/10 0 (Be3)} Kg7 {0} 58. Kh2 {-1.73/10 0 (Be3)}
Qd8 {1} 59. Kg2 {-1.73/10 0 (Be3)} Kg8 {0} 60. Kh2 {-1.73/9 0 (Be3)} Ra8 {0}
61. Kg2 {-1.73/9 0 (Be3)} Qd7 {0} 62. Kh2 {-1.69/11 0 (Be3)} Qb5 {0} 63. Kg2 {
-1.85/10 0} a4 {-1.65/14 0} 64. Kh2 {0 (Ng5)} Kg7 {-1.97/10 0} 65. Kg2 {0 (Nd2)
} Kf8 {0} 66. Kh2 {-1.69/10 0 (Nd2)} Nd6 {0} 67. Kg2 {-1.89/10 0 (Ne5)} Nf5 {0}
68. Kh2 {-1.81/13 0 (Rf2)} Kg8 {-1.81/10 0} 69. Kg2 {1} Be7 {-1.93/16 0} 70.
Kh2 {0 (Ng5)} Rc8 {0} 71. Kg2 {-1.89/10 0} Kg7 {-1.89/17 0} 72. Kh2 {0 (Ng5)}
Rg8 {0} 73. Kg2 {-1.89/10 0} Re8 {0} 74. Kh2 {-1.89/16 0 (Ng5)} Bd8 {0} 75. Kg2
{-1.89/10 0 (Ng5)} Bc7 {0} 76. Kh2 {-2.06/11 0 (Qb1)} f6 {0} 77. Kg2 {-2.02/9 0
} Ra6 {-2.06/15 0} 78. Kh2 {0 (Be3)} Qd7 {0} 79. Kg2 {-2.10/11 0 (Be3)} b5 {-2.
10/9 0} 80. Kh2 {0 (Be3)} Raa8 {0} 81. Kg2 {-2.06/8 0 (Be3)} Qd6 {0} 82. Kh2 {
-2.10/7 0 (Be3)} Qc6 {0} 83. Kg2 {-2.02/9 0 (Be3)} Rab8 {0} 84. Kh2 {-1.93/10
0 (Be3)} Rbd8 {0} 85. Kg2 {-2.18/6 0 (Be3)} Qd6 {0} 86. Kh2 {-2.02/9 0 (Be3)}
Rb8 {0} 87. Kg2 {-1.97/10 0 (Be3)} Rbc8 {0} 88. Kh2 {-2.06/9 0} Rcd8 {0} 89.
Kg2 {-2.02/18 0 (Qb1)} Rb8 {0} 90. Kh2 {-2.06/8 0 (Be3)} Qa6 {0} 91. Kg2 {-2.
06/8 0 (Be3)} Ra8 {0} 92. Kh2 {-2.14/6 0 (Kh3)} Rac8 {0} 93. Kg2 {-2.06/8 0
(Be3)} Qc6 {0} 94. Kh2 {-2.10/6 0 (Be3)} Rb8 {0} 95. Kg2 {-2.06/7 0 (Be3)} Ra8
{0} 96. Kh2 {-2.14/6 0 (Be3)} Rac8 {0} 97. Kg2 {-2.06/7 0 (Be3)} Qd7 {0} 98.
Kh2 {-2.06/5 0 (Be3)} Rb8 {0} 99. Kg2 {-2.02/5 0 (Be3)} Ra8 {0} 100. Kh2 {-2.
06/6 0 (Qd1)} Nd6 {0} 101. Kg2 {-2.14/6 0} Ba5 {-1.97/17 0} 102. Kh2 {0 (Be3)}
Nf5 {0} 103. Kg2 {-1.97/7 0 (Be3)} Qd6 {-2.06/6 0} 104. Kh2 {0 (Be3)} Bb6 {0}
105. Kg2 {-2.02/7 0 (Be3)} Rac8 {0} 106. Kh2 {-1.97/6 0 (Qb1)} Bc7 {0} 107. Kg2
{-2.02/6 0 (Be3)} Re7 {0} 108. Kh2 {-2.02/6 0 (Kh3)} Rf8 {0} 109. Kg2 {-2.06/7
0 (Be3)} Ree8 {0} 110. Kh2 {-2.38/2 0} Qa6 {0} 111. Kg2 {-2.02/16 0 (Be3)} Rh8
{0} 112. Kh2 {-2.18/2 0 (Be3)} Qc6 {0} 113. Kg2 {-2.34/2 0 (Bd2)} Qd6 {0} 114.
Kh2 {-2.42/2 0} Qa6 {0} 115. Kg2 {-2.02/18 0 (Be3)} Rhf8 {0} 116. Kh2 {-2.34/2
0 (Qb1)} Qc6 {0} 117. Kg2 {-2.38/2 0 (Be3)} Qd7 {0} 118. Kh2 {-2.22/2 0 (Bd2)}
Rh8 {0} 119. Kg2 {-2.34/2 0 (Bd2)} Qc6 {0} 120. Kh2 {-2.34/2 0 (Qb1)} Rhg8 {0}
121. Kg2 {-2.30/2 0 (Be3)} Qd6 {0} 122. Kh2 {-2.34/2 0} Rh8 {0} 123. Kg2 {-1.
77/15 0 (Be3)} Bb6 {0} 124. Kh2 {-2.22/2 0 (Be3)} Rhf8 {0} 125. Kg2 {-2.26/2 0
(Bd2)} Rf7 {0} 126. Re3 {-2.22/2 0 (Be3)} Nxe3+ {0} 127. Rxe3 {-3.11/2 0 (Bxe3)
} Ra8 {-3.55/2 0} 128. Kh2 {1 . (Re1)} Rff8 {0} 129. Kg2 {-3.75/2 0} Rfc8 {0}
130. Kh2 {-3.23/18 0 (Re1) Time (Lag: Av=0.68s, max=1.3s)} 1-0

[Steve B]

This is not exactly Germain to your post Pablo so please forgive the slight diversion but actually i tried something similiar with dedicated computers
i ran a series of odds matches pitting several dedicated computers against a 2700 PC engine to see what combination of material and or time odds could even the playing strength

i came to the conclusion that material was way more important then time
with R odds pretty much able to overcome a 1000 pt elo difference while huge time odds were not

the study was by no means exhaustive and would need far more work put into it but for anyone interested :

http://hiarcs.net/forums/viewtopic.php?t=3346

Regards
Steve

[Father]

Good morning Steve B (Steve B) for you, your people, your famely your Country. God bless you ever,
I have seen just a moment ago your post. What an interesting experiment!! Chess "computers power" really has improved a lot in this last 36 years.!!
When I was 19 I started playing computers against a Chess Challenger No 7 from Fidelity Electronics. What a happy days were this days!! Then my Father was alive. The reason of my nickname, as, "Father" , in playchess.com, is a little prove of love that myself I have gotten to the memory of my great Father Q.E.P.D. He dead in 1986. I hope some day to be with him and my friends and relatives that have gone away first than me in the heaven, I hope God to recive me there...I hope...really hope...
Regards,
Pablo Ignacio Restrepo

Note. Congratullation for your post, it is a real great experiment.!!!

[Steve B]

Thank you for your kind remarks Pablo
i have been following your " anti -engine" chess posts from the beginning
i also follow your exploits on Tim Krabbes web site
he has very high regard for your work with the current day engines

its very good that there are many different niches(areas of interest) in our hobby

Best Regards
Steve

[Nimzovik]

Hmmmmmmm............. Yes......... Interesting.