Author: Uri Blass
Date: 10:50:20 09/19/05
Go up one level in this thread
On September 19, 2005 at 13:11:06, Chan Rasjid wrote: >Ali - >"This is simply wrong ;I looked at the NPS for both programs" > >On rigorous scientific( == commonsense)methodology, your experiments would not >be passed by any sane person. > >1) The nps of 500 by chessTiger can only be known to Christopher Theron. GNU >chess's 500k, will be known to me if written by me and compiled by me. Reading >from lcd/screens has no scientific value here. > >2) most importantly, GNU 4.11 may not be fitting for such experiments. Those > who know how a chess program works know that some programs can be just not > fit for the experiment you have in mind. GNU Chess given 1000x may mean > nothing. Maybe given 1 year/move on a top current PC > vs.Crafty with 1 day/move and no pondering :- > > Experiment of the Century > ========================= > GNU Chess 4.11 - W > Crafty 19.00 - B; > Result 68 years later:- > 0 - 1 Checkmate. This experiment is unimportant but if you want to do it you can save time by not starting it now. Wait x years until hardware will be 68 times faster and you can finish the game in x+1 years I think that x<67 Uri
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.