Author: Steven Edwards
Date: 17:51:09 03/17/04
Go up one level in this thread
On March 17, 2004 at 16:07:27, Dave Gomboc wrote: >On March 16, 2004 at 22:23:06, Steven Edwards wrote: >>On March 16, 2004 at 21:05:40, Dave Gomboc wrote: >>>On March 16, 2004 at 06:32:55, Steven Edwards wrote: >> >>>>A few points on the 1800 Elo number in the primary goal set: >>>> >>>>1. The only test suite data we have for Paradise is just under a hundred >>>>positions from the first one hundred positions from WAC. I think its >>>>performance was somewhat under 2000 Elo because of its time limit of forty-five >>>>minutes per move, and that is one reason for the 1800 Elo figure in the primary >>>>goal set. >>> >>>45 minutes on a machine from 20 years ago is about how long, on today's >>>hardware? Three seconds. Besides, IIRC, Wilkins only gave it that kind of time >>>because it was being interpreted as it ran. Your stuff will be compiled, or at >>>least JIT-compiled, won't it? >> >>Nope. ChessLisp is interpretation only at this point. > >Okay, in that case you can have the full 3 seconds per move! ;-) Ah, but remember that I'm using a four year old 400 MHz PPC as the reference platform. Perhaps some one could donate one of those dual 2.4 GHz G5 64 bit desktop PowerMacs that are rumored to be announced next week. Only US$3000. Oh, and a decent chessboard size industrial robotic arm goes for about US$2,500; I could use one of those as well. When Symbolic isn't using it for chess, said arm would surely amuse my cats. I'm not affiliated with any university, so I can't suck any money from acadamia. There's too much paperwork needed to get DARPA bucks. Finally, it just may be that Symbolic could be evolved into a general warfare planner, so that would eliminate any unrestricted sale or release of the source.
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.