Author: Slater Wold
Date: 23:28:03 07/07/02
Go up one level in this thread
On July 08, 2002 at 00:32:42, Christophe Theron wrote: >On July 06, 2002 at 20:15:06, stuart taylor wrote: > >> >>> >>>I suspect that search may see that the right move help to push the opponent king >>>closer to the corner relative to the wrong moves and it may be enough. >>> >>>Uri >> >>Yes, that looks like the best thing to try and work on, doesn't it? >> >>If not, can I ask two questions?: >>1)What should be done during the near future to push computer elo forward as >>much as possible? >>2)If Deeper blue was really much stronger than todays tops, what was that due >>to? Better long-term planning? Seeing deeper? >>S.Taylor > > >Huge speed. > >It was doing most things worse than the best micro programs, but it was doing it >so fast that it was eventually stronger. > >Hum... Let me rephrase for the sensitive people out there. There was nothing >Deep Blue did better than the best micro programs. But it was so fast that it >allowed it to hide its defficiencies. > >Shit. That's not very diplomatic either. Let's try again: Deep Blue was build >around a concept outdated by 2 decades but fortunately it was so fast that >nobody noticed until their creators published their paper. > >Oops... OK, once again: > >Bob likes Deep Blue a lot, and that should be a reason good enough to convince >you that it was well designed. > > > > Christophe ;-) I too am a DB fan. Just like Bob. But I actually agree with you here. I don't think DB did anything *spectacular*. But I also know that Program X will be a _LOT_ stronger on hardware 100,000x times faster than anyone else has. No matter how horrible the software side is.
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.