Author: Aaron Tay
Date: 10:59:55 10/09/00
Go up one level in this thread
On October 09, 2000 at 13:38:37, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On October 09, 2000 at 12:46:27, Joshua Lee wrote: > >>Since you can't compare them by playing each other what about comparing >>printouts? Are there any printouts that have NPS Depth line etc. If i had this i >>would attempt. I did look at a game against Chiptest where CB had 14 Ne6 but >>played Na4<-- not the losing move but not as good as Ne6 CB get's a queen Vs 3 >>minor pieces which is not easy but it would be alot better than the situation >>before if CB could keep his queen on and exchange rooks it makes it easier. As >>Black's only chances would be to obtain a new queen not likely. So the outcome >>is probably a draw but this is just my guess. To see this move for Crafty would >>be over 14Ply on my 800Mhz Athlon just to give you some idea. If you can >>elaborate on CB's earlier versions and how they played maybe this will answer my >>questions and help you to improve on crafty. >> >> >>Sometimes it's all about asking the right question. >> >>thank you > > >Actually I did this a couple of years ago and posted the results in r.g.c.c I >believe. I took a couple of the world championship 1986 games (the wc won by >CB for the second time in a row) and had Crafty 'annotate' the games. It was >uncanny how they agreed tactically. Of course, 1986 CB was doing maybe 100-200K >nodes per second max, so crafty had a big edge in speed. But it found _zero_ >tactical mistakes by CB. > >I analyzed the games partly in a discussion with Chris Whittington where he >was into the usual mode of criticizing Cray Blitz for any reason. He picked on >one particular move as looking foolish. Someone else pointed out that CSTal >played the _same_ move, as it was tactically forced to avoid losing a pawn, >but of course that didn't make any difference. I became interested in how >Crafty would compare. I gave crafty more time than CB had, using faster >hardware than CB had (1986 hardware for CB, remember), and it couldn't find >any move it would label as a mistake or oversight. > >CB was tactically very strong. In most positional cases the two programs were >in agreement as well, which is not surprising since I wrote both. > >The main advantage CB might have had back then was far faster hardware than >anything I might run Crafty on in 1986. Of course Crafty would have run on a >Cray back then, but it would have been far slower as Crafty is not vectorized >while CB was. I suspect there is not a lot of difference in the two programs >today. CB might have a tactical edge due to singular extensions and a bit of >selectiveness near the leaf positions, while crafty probably has more >positional (particularly endgame) knowledge (excepting king safety where CB >was clearly better). Sorry to interrupt, but does that mean that as of today you wouldn't bet on Crafty running on your current hardware to beat CB (the lastest/last version)? So when do you anticipate will Crafty overtake CB? In 5 years time, when everone is using better hardware?
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.