Author: stuart taylor
Date: 02:38:47 07/08/02
Go up one level in this thread
On July 08, 2002 at 02:28:03, Slater Wold wrote: >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around a concept outdated by 2 decades but fortunately it was so fast that 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. Didn't DB have some deep understanding of things like bishops and other things, due to GM's working on it? (even if overall it wasn't that great if not for the speed). And, now a very important question WHAT DID WE SEE ABOUT LONG TERM PLANNING OF DB WITH ALL THAT SPEED? WERE THERE ANY INNADEQUACIES, OR, WAS IT SEEN THAT IF THE PROGRAMING WOULD HAVE BEEN SLIGHTLY BETTER, IT WOULD HAVE OVERCOME ALL INNADEQUACIES, (THE LITTLE BIT IT DID STILL HAVE)? S.Taylor
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.