Author: Dana Turnmire
Date: 11:30:23 04/12/02
Go up one level in this thread
>>Wouldn't a very fast stupid program be at a disadvantage to a much newer and >>smarter one? From what I have read Deep Blue wasn't that sophisticated when it >>came to forward pruning and general chess knowledge. > >Deeper Blue was _anything_ but a stupid programme, I see you really haven't any >hard data on the whole Deep Blue project, which goes all the way back to >Chiptest, which evoloved into Deep Thought, which became the "Manhatten Project" >of chess playing machines. Deeper Blue was "smarter" than Fritz. > >Terry Maybe I was confusing Deep Blue with Deeper Blue. In an article by IM Larry Kaufman in the Computer Chess Reports/Volume 5/page 37 he said concerning Deep Blue which Kasparov beat: "Aside from the opening book, Blue's problems seem to be a tendency towards planless play in closed positions, and in general a crude evaluation function, which allowed Kasporov to outplay Blue positionally." Would it be said of the current top programs that they have a "crude evaluation function?"
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.