Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: How many GHZ for IGM to never win and then always lose? -- Never.

Author: Imran Hendley

Date: 19:29:08 08/31/00

Go up one level in this thread


On August 31, 2000 at 18:09:19, Les Fernandez wrote:

>On August 31, 2000 at 15:59:44, Dann Corbit wrote:
>
>>On August 31, 2000 at 15:41:39, stuart taylor wrote:
>>
>>>If you had D.O. 200 plies brute force for every move, I think there can be no
>>>question about it, that GM will always lose! If one time it was a draw, the GM
>>>could be justly proud of himself, even if he was world champion.
>>>I can't imagine how much mhz that would be, though.
>>>S.Taylor   (maybe 1 with 6-700 naughts).
>>
>>A trillion terahertz computer could come nowhere close to 200 plies.  Probably
>>closer to 20.  Consider this little list:
>>White(1): perft 2
>>total moves=400  time=0.00
>>White(1): perft 3
>>total moves=8902  time=0.01
>>White(1): perft 4
>>total moves=197281  time=0.29
>>White(1): perft 5
>>total moves=4865609  time=6.60
>>White(1): perft 6
>>total moves=119060324  time=164.04
>>
>>Draw yourself a graph.  Imagine what time looks like at 20.  That search would
>>play infallible chess, but most real searches don't work like that.  They
>>examine the square root of the node counts.  So work out about what it will look
>>like at 20, and take the square root.  You will still find that the square root
>>of a truly ridiculous number is still a ridiculous number.
>>
>>With massive pruning, it might get deeper, but then it would be open to errors
>>like null move zugzwang situations, etc.
>>
>>Dann Corbit makes a prophecy:
>>"Computers will *never* (and I do mean never, ever, ever no matter how many
>>years forward -- millions of years, billions of years, trillions of years) fully
>
>Hi Dann lets not forget the quantum computer.  I just read something about IBM
>having set up one with 8 qbits.  If this technology matures as it appears to be
>doing then who knows what kind of things and speeds will be possible.  In this
>past Science News (August 19,2000 Vol.158, No.8) the title "computer grid cracks
>problem" talks about solving the nug30 quadratic assignment problem.  This is
>about how to assign 30 facilities to 30 fixed locations so as to minimize the
>total cost of transferring material between facilities.  They claim that if we
>had a computer that could check 1 trillion variations per second it would take
>approximately 100 times the age of the universe!  Now were talking <s>.  What
>these guys at the University of Iowa they worked with Argonne National Labs and
>developed algorithms and ssoftware that enabled 1000 computers working
>simultaneously at 8 institutions in different parts of the world to solve this
>problem in just about a week.  So who really knows what we can do!! Thought you
>all would be interested.
>
>Les
>>examine 200 plies forward at tournament time controls of 40/2."

That's a fascinating story. It's always amazing to hear about great leaps foward
in technology. Yes the thought of a quantum computer is mindboggling, but I
think one more thing Dann mentioned was the storage capacity needed to produce a
chess engine as powerful as the one we want to solve chess or see so far ahead.
Oh yeah, and has anyone heard of DNA computers? I remember reading something
about them awhile ago. They were set up to solve insanely difficult problems.
Can anyone refresh my memory?



This page took 0 seconds to execute

Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700

Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.