Author: Vincent Diepeveen
Date: 14:21:50 06/22/01
Go up one level in this thread
On June 22, 2001 at 15:41:33, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On June 22, 2001 at 11:26:26, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: > >>On June 22, 2001 at 10:50:01, Robert Hyatt wrote: >> >>>On June 22, 2001 at 10:37:18, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: >>> >>>>On June 22, 2001 at 10:35:10, Harald Faber wrote: >>>> >>>>>On June 22, 2001 at 08:28:01, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>Hello, >>>>>> >>>>>>My dual has searched past few days at next position: >>>>>> >>>>>[D]2rr2k1/pp1qnppp/2n1p3/3p4/1bPP3P/1P2RNP1/PB3P2/1BRQ2K1 w - - 0 1 >>>>>>kasparov-deep blue 1996 bxh7!! >>>>>> >>>>>>Here is the result of the current diep version (threats on, recaptures >>>>>>on, checks on, SE on, etcetera on): >>>>>> >>>>>>dual PIII800 150mb hash >>>>>>01:39:58 0 0 415044900 (74138755) 14 0.468 a2-a3 Bb4-a5 b3-b4 Ba5-c7 Qd1-d3 Ne7- >>>>>>g6 h4-h5 Ng6-f8 h5-h6 g7-g6 b4-b5 Nc6-a5 c4xd5 >>>>>>++ b1-h7 >>>>>>04:59:23 0 0 1234506378 (199255362) 14 0.767 Bb1xh7 Kg8xh7 Nf3-g5 Kh7-g6 Qd1-d3 >>>>>>Ne7-f5 g3-g4 Kg6-f6 g4xf5 e6xf5 a2-a3 Bb4-e7 c4xd5 Qd7xd5 Re3-e1 Be7-d6 Qd3-f3 >>>>>> >>>>>>It is busy 42 hours now to get a new mainline for Bxh7 at 17 ply, >>>>>>so i guess it has seen more than 10 billion nodes now. >>>>>> >>>>>>Score is 0.828 for Bxh7 after 17 hours though and my expectation is that >>>>>>to get the next PV i need to wait another 40 hours at least, and that the >>>>>>score hasn't changed too much, and i need my dual now to do other things! >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>So you want to say that you just need a 50x faster machine (or 100x to be safe) >>>>>that your Diep plays like Kasparow (:-)))) and makes the move in a tournament >>>>>game? :-) >>>> >>>>Deep Blue's score of 0.00 was not correct. >>>> >>>>Note that a3 c5 b4 also wins chanceless for white, as proven by Kasparov >>>>and obvious for any chessplayer. >>>> >>>>Nevertheless Bxh7 is a cool shot for white. >>> >>>Note that DB's score was a hell of a lot more correct than yours. IE when it >>>played its last move, it _expected_ Bxh7 and had seen a repetition. Whether the >>>draw was forced or not, it saw it after a couple of minutes from the move before >>>where you are searching. How long did it take you to get an idea Bxh7 was >>>good? Just how well do you compare to DB? Back up one move and let your >>>program search until it sees Bxh7 for your _opponent_. Then you will begin to >>>see how deeply they could search. >>> >>>You are at the wrong position and it _still_ takes you forever to find Bxh7. >> >>This is utterly nonsense, >> a) diep doesn't play the same horrible moves which DB played > > >Did you read what I wrote? I said tht you are trying to find Bxh7 and having >a _hard_ time doing it. DB found it for the _opponent_ as it expected this in >the game. This means that after you strip off one ply of its search, it _still_ >cound see the tactics that make Bxh7 look interesting. You can not find it in >2-3 minutes from Kasparov's move... yet DB found it when it was trying to choose >a move. > >Get it now? You don't want to get it, but in order to get this lost position, there DB played somehorrible moves which diep doesn't play because it knows a bit more! > > > >> b) the reason diep doesn't initially play Bxh7 is because it >> wants to win the game by means of pawn majority, just like kasparov, >> only when it sees tactical way more as DB it plays Bxh7 > >That is funny. DB saw this as the second move in its PV from the previous >search. you can barely find it as the _first_ move in your PV and it takes >forever to do so. And you see "tactically way more as DB"??? > >I don't follow at _all_.. Score is wrong from DB. We can discuss in length, but that's it. My score is better when i get Bxh7, with DB that would take forever to get 14 ply with SE and fullwidth. > > >> c) DB had 0.00 for Bxh7 so how it positionally played must be obvious >> for even a beginner as other moves as Bxh7 must have been < 0.00 which >> means better for black. That's dead wrong. White is won here with or >> without Bxh7. Bxh7 is however a tactical shot which wins by force. >> Whether it's smart for a human to play it, that's a completely different >> discussion but bottom line is that DIEP evaluates this BETTER as >> deep blue does, and even the evaluation of DIEP in this pos i have >> some doubts at because it doesn't know of course what a semi closed >> position is. > > >I will be impressed when I see you win some games vs kasparov.... I win daily with diep better games as DB won from kasparov. >or even against a program that can't beat the program that couldn't beat >deep thought... This is too deep for me to follow. Which program can't win from Deep Thought? Any todays program would completely kill a piece square table based program of course. Weakest chain is too tough for such an old program. Best regards, Vincent
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.