Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Crafty modified to Deep Blue - Crafty needs testers to produce outputs

Author: Ulrich Tuerke

Date: 07:40:55 06/18/01

Go up one level in this thread


On June 18, 2001 at 10:25:36, Uri Blass wrote:

>On June 18, 2001 at 10:01:45, Ulrich Tuerke wrote:
>
>>On June 18, 2001 at 08:54:10, Uri Blass wrote:
>>
>>>On June 18, 2001 at 08:33:21, Ulrich Tuerke wrote:
>>>
>>>>On June 18, 2001 at 08:28:08, Bas Hamstra wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On June 17, 2001 at 01:09:50, Robert Hyatt wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>On June 16, 2001 at 22:59:06, Vincent Diepeveen wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Hello,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>From Gian-Carlo i received tonight a cool version of crafty 18.10,
>>>>>>>namely a modified version of crafty. The modification was that it
>>>>>>>is using a small sense of Singular extensions, using a 'moreland'
>>>>>>>implementation.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Instead of modifying Crafty to simulate Deep Blue, why didn't you
>>>>>>modify Netscape?  Or anything else?  I don't see _any_  point in
>>>>>>taking a very fishy version of crafty and trying to conclude _anything_
>>>>>>about deep blue from it...
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Unless you are into counting chickens to forecast weather, or something
>>>>>>else...
>>>>>
>>>>>I don't agree here. It is fun. Maybe not extremely accurate, but it says
>>>>>*something* about the efficiency of their search, which I believe is horrible. I
>>>>>think using SE and not nullmove is *inefficient* as compared to nullmove. We
>>>>>don't need 100.0000% accurate data when it's obviously an order of magnitude
>>>>>more inefficient.
>>>>
>>>>May be you are right, if the program is running on a PC. However if you can
>>>>reach a huge depth anyway because of hardware, may be you can afford to use
>>>>this, because it doesn't matter too much wasting one ply depth ?
>>>
>>>It is not about wasting one ply but about clearly more than it and
>>>it is clear that not using null move is counter productive when the difference
>>>becomes bigger and not smaller at longer time control so the fact that they had
>>>better hardware only supports using null move.
>>
>>How can you be so sure ? Do you really know that all of the top programs are
>>using null move. I wouldn't bet too high on this. There may be viable
>>alternatives to this, though not being published.
>
>I know that Junior and Rebel do not use null move but they use other pruning
>techniques.
>
>I do not believe that the technique of no pruning+singular extension is good at
>long time control and this is the point.

You may be right or not. Who knows ?
Who really knows the program of the Deep Blue guys ?
IMHO, the discussion is far too speculative.

I guess that these gentlemen were knowing very well what they were doing.
I think that it's almost some kind of arrogance, to disqaulify their program
without knowing a thing. Isn't it ?

Uli

>

>Uri



This page took 0.01 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.