Author: Bas Hamstra
Date: 08:19:41 06/18/01
Go up one level in this thread
On June 18, 2001 at 10:40:55, Ulrich Tuerke wrote: >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 ? Now you sound exactly like Bob. Noone is disqualifying their program. At the time unbeatable. But it *is* possible to compare search model A with search model B and conclude that B is better. DB is not a magical black box that we know absolutely about. We know they didn't prune. So they could have even been stronger. Best regards, Bas.
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.