Author: stuart taylor
Date: 19:55:10 01/13/00
Go up one level in this thread
On January 13, 2000 at 16:31:04, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On January 13, 2000 at 03:50:51, Bruce Moreland wrote: > >>On January 12, 2000 at 15:12:21, Rajendran Ramachandran wrote: >> >>>On January 11, 2000 at 21:46:38, Roger wrote: >>> >>>>Excerpt from the interview: >>>> >>>>"For instance, if you were to remove the database, you can >>>>have a computer ten times faster than it is today. Ten >>>>times faster than Deep Blue, easily. If it couldn't >>>>consult its opening book, my result would improve >>>>immediately. I think most of the top twenty, thirty >>>>players could beat Beep Blue if it wasn't allowed to >>>>consult an opening database. Or, even the opening >>>>database is restricted to a certain size. What happens >>>>is, their opening database is almost 400-500 MBs of >>>>information. It has access to all the games that are >>>>played but we have to remember all that. Or, if I am >>>>allowed to have a computer with me, okay, I can't check >>>>my thoughts but I can see what was played at any given >>>>time. My result would then go up." >>>> >>>>I think he's wrong >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>Well...It just could be translation..Or your way of understanding the free >>>flowing conversation... >>> >>>Probably he meant that without database even if you have a computer that is ten >>>times faster than Deep Blue, top players could beat the computer. >>> >>>I think he is right! >> >>It is a two parter. One is what would happen if the program played without a >>book. The other is what would happen if the book were restricted to a smaller >>size. >> >>I think that without a book you are likely to see an increase in inferior moves >>right off the top, so as white the computer ends up discarding its advantage, >>and as black it ends up getting into trouble quickly. There is also the issue >>of repeatability of lines, it's a lot easier to beat something that plays the >>same way every time. >> >>I think he's wrong regarding a smaller book, unless it's super small, like just >>a few moves. With a few thousand moves you reduce the chance of repeated games, >>and you give the program a higher liklihood of getting its pieces developed, >>leading to a game where the program is less likely to get instantly creamed. >> >>bruce > > >Right. But I have re-read his statement several times, and the only >interpretation I can make is that he thinks that by removing the opening >book, it will speed the program up 10X. > >>>>"For instance, if you were to remove the database, you can >>>>have a computer ten times faster than it is today. Ten >>>>times faster than Deep Blue, easily. > >ie "if you remove ..." -> "you can have ..." > >That is obviously wrong. > >And "ten times faster than deep blue, easily" sure seems difficult to >imagine... IMHO. :) Even if removing the database actually DID speed the program 10x, I would still say that Anand didn't mean that at all. I've heard enough of non-English people speaking to know that. He would have said it completely differently otherwise. A momments thought should make that quite obvious. S.Taylor
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.