Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 10:27:15 07/08/02
Go up one level in this thread
On July 08, 2002 at 12:48:58, Sune Fischer wrote: >On July 08, 2002 at 11:34:36, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>>I too am a DB fan. Just like Bob. >>> >>>But I actually agree with you here. I don't think DB did anything >>>*spectacular*. >> >>I totally disagree. Their speed _was_ "spectacular". And that was _the_ >>point of Deep Blue, after all. Not the point everyone _wants_ to be the >>point of deep blue, but _the point_ the team developed over 10 years... >> > >Here is a crazy thought, why not simulate DB? >Given all the papers, I think it should be possible to modify Craft to use the >same eval and extensions. We turn off hashing, nullmove, SEE and whatever DB >didn't have. Then we find a slow machine for Tiger and a super fast one for >Crafty, so Crafty (in DB-mode) has a 200 nps fold advantage. > >Ok lot of work, but seems this is the never ending story :) > >-S. This would be great if we had some of the DB guys helping. Unfortunately, while they revealed a lot about various parts of DB, there is no single comprehensive source paper to use as a reference. IE what are those 8,000 unique eval terms in DB (some of those terms actually represent a matrix with multiple values so it is actually more complex than that)? Ditto for some of their search algorithms. They have given lots of 'hints' about things, but significant implementation details are not available. IE something like trying to build a F-1 by looking at it run around the track. There are _significant_ details that are not readily apparent from such observations...
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.