25,161
edits
Changes
no edit summary
First of all it must be noted that the concept of Corresponding Squares was designed to give the human chess player a tool to efficiently analyze a complex pawn endgame. Computers can very easily solve such positions using their Transposition Tables. Just as an example it takes Computers only a couple of seconds to reach > depth 20 in the [[Lasker-Reichhelm Position|Lasker-Reichhelm position]], also referred as [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reuben_Fine Fine] #70 <ref>[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reuben_Fine Reuben Fine] ('''1941'''). ''[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basic_Chess_Endings Basic Chess Endings]''</ref> and thus find the opponent's Zugzwang. Nevertheless Computers also have some disadvantages. The main problem is the point where the chess engine has to decide whether to enter a certain pawn ending or not. Usually these positions offer a lot more mobility, thus conducting a deep enough search seems infeasible.
The first attempt of tackling Corresponding Squares with a computer chess engine was made by [[Rafael B. Andrist]] and his chess program [[Wilhelm]] <ref>[https://www.stmintz.com/ccc/index.php?id=184365 chess program "Wilhelm" released] by [[Rafael B. Andrist]], [[CCC]], August 19, 2001</ref> <ref>[http://www.mysnip.de/forum-archiv/thema/1578/299490/Gegenfeldsysteme+und+Schachprogramm.html Gegenfeldsysteme und Schachprogramm] by [[Rafael B. Andrist]], [[ChessBits|ChessBits Forum]], August 19, 2001 (German)</ref> . More recent research was done by [[Edmund Moshammer]]:
=Algorithm by Moshammer=
