Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 14:12:53 07/06/02
Go up one level in this thread
On July 06, 2002 at 11:46:44, Ricardo Gibert wrote: >On July 06, 2002 at 10:25:44, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On July 06, 2002 at 01:28:07, Ricardo Gibert wrote: >> >>> >>>When I read in CCC that the Deep Blue search had an EBF of about 4, my thoughts >>>were, "Ugh! That means that in about 50 years of the expected hardware >>>improvements, the PC programs of the day will be able to surpass Deep Blue even >>>if Deep Blue were to get the commensurate hardware improvements." >> >>The problem is that you are making a _classic_ mistake. The EBF has _nothing_ >>to do with how the two programs will compare. What is important is the _tree_ >>that both search. If one does a 20 ply search, and the other does a 10 ply >>search, but they search the same tree, then they play equally tactically. >> >>Don't get hung up on a 20 ply search depth (iteration number). It doesn't >>mean a thing when compared to _other_ programs.. >> > >I understand the idea you are mentioning. However, the 20 ply search depth >_does_ mean _a lot_ when they are not doing any effective forward pruning. It >means they are wasting a lot of time searching crap in those 20 plys. > So? How many plies of "crap" is a commercial micro searching? A bunch. Again, apples and oranges. DB is searching deeper along forcing lines than anybody else does. So what if they search deeper along bad lines as well. _everybody_ is doing that anyway... >> >> >>> >>>The big advantage in EBF of the then current programs is like a juggernaut that >>>cannot be stopped. That I was not impressed with Deep Blue is an understatement. >>>Deep Blue was superior...then, but this was *despite* its method of search. Its >>>hardware made it superior and not its search methods. >> >> >>Its search methods are far from primitive. IE they have been doing singular >>extensions since the late 1980's. Others started to copy the idea much later. >>That is but one example. EBF is meaningless. It is possible that a program >>with an EBF of 30 could still be world champion, and in spite of the fact that >>it only does _one_ search iteration per move. All it has to do is extend the >>_right_ moves and not extend the rest...
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.