Author: Omid David Tabibi
Date: 16:23:20 01/11/03
Go up one level in this thread
On January 11, 2003 at 08:23:43, Frank Phillips wrote: >"The next question is, and many people are asking it, do we know how Deep Junior >compares in strength with Deep Blue? The really interesting thing, from the AI >point of view in general and for computer chess researchers in particular, is >that Deep Junior examines something like one percent of the number of positions >per second of Deep Blue. But despite this Deep Junior may well play better chess >because its "understanding" of the game is better. It appears to have more chess >knowledge and understanding in its evaluation function than Deep Blue did, and >this compensates for the difference in positions-per-second.." Extract from >Levy on Chessbase.com site > > >From what I read in Behind Deep Blue I find this surprising. But then again, I >no nothing about Junior other than it is an awesome program. > >If only Hsu had produced his chip so we could have answered this question rather >than use it to fires. > If say Deep Blue was 100x faster than Deep Junior, then I suggest that you conduct the following test: Take an engine which has a very simple evaluation function, and its speed (NPS) is about Junior's speed, turn off all its selectivity (e.g. null-move pruning, futility pruning, etc), and let it play against Deep Junior. The time control should be 100x in favor of the brute force engine, e.g. 500 min/game for the brute force one, and 5 min/game for Deep Junior. I will gladly bet on a convincing win for Deep Junior. >Good luck to Junior and team in the coming match. > >Frank
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.