Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: What do programmers think about a chess algorithm??

Author: Vincent Diepeveen

Date: 04:05:44 12/10/02

Go up one level in this thread


On December 09, 2002 at 22:26:11, Bernardo Wesler wrote:

>Do they consider it as an uthopy?
  Consider what as an uthopy? What is your question here?

>If so, what is the scientific reason?
  Idem

>If it was possible, how far are they from that point? Did they find any
>evidence?
  Away from which point?

>Anyway, which is the possibility to get a very powerful chess engine or program
>or soft that depends almost nothing upon the hardware?

  Hardware is very important if the evaluation of a program is very good.

  Of course putting gnuchess or crafty at 10000 processors
  doesn't make sense, apart
  from that making an algorithm that gives a positive speedup at 10000
  processors is 1000x more difficult to make than a program at the level
  of gnuchess.

  Evaluation dominates. I see at least 3 programs which are setting
  the standards towards progress in evaluation: Brutus, Shredder, DIEP.

  Also indicative is Fritz. The latest fritz also has way more evaluation
  than the old versions, though it still is very little compared to the
  above 3, whereas we must see Shredder as a kind of middle solution between
  the other 2.

  Shredder is very well tested basically.





>Thx.
>Dr Wesler
>blwesler@mail.retina.ar



This page took 0.02 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.