Author: Jouni Uski
Date: 03:11:50 05/25/00
Go up one level in this thread
On May 25, 2000 at 05:57:44, Enrique Irazoqui wrote: >On May 24, 2000 at 18:00:12, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On May 24, 2000 at 15:08:15, Ernst A. Heinz wrote: >> >>>Dear Fellow Computer-Chess Enthusiasts, >>> >>>In view of the current discussion about diminishing returns in the thread >>>"Ply Depth in Relation to ELO again", I like to share the results of my >>>latest self-play experiment with you. >>> >>>The stunning outcome of the new experiment is that it shows the existence >>>of diminishing returns for additional search in computer chess self-play >>>with 95% statistical confidence, exemplified by the program "Fritz 6"! >>> >>>The title and abstract of my M.I.T. LCS Technical Report on the >>>experiment follow below. >>> >>>*********************************************************************** >>> >>> ``A New Self-Play Experiment in Computer Chess'' >>> >>> ABSTRACT >>> >>>This paper presents the results of a new self-play experiment in >>>computer chess. It is the first such experiment ever to feature search >>>depths beyond 9 plies and thousands of games for every single match. >>>Overall, we executed 17,150 self-play games (1,050--3,000 per match) >>>in one "calibration" match and seven "depth X+1 <=> X" handicap >>>matches at fixed iteration depths ranging from 5--12 plies. For >>>the experiment to be realistic and independently repeatable, we relied >>>on a state-of-the-art commercial contestant: "Fritz6", one of the >>>strongest modern chess programs available. The main result of our new >>>experiment is that it shows the existence of diminishing returns for >>>additional search in computer chess self-play with 95% statistical >>>confidence, exemplified by the program "Fritz6". The diminishing >>>returns manifest themselves by declining rates of won games and >>>reversely increasing rates of drawn games for the deeper searching >>>program versions. The rate of lost games, however, remains quite >>>steady for the whole depth range of 5--12 plies. >>> >>>*********************************************************************** >>> >>>Please find the full report in gzip'ed PostScript format at the URL >>><http://supertech.lcs.mit.edu/~heinz/ps/new_exp.ps.gz>. >>> >>>Any comments welcome! >>> >>>=Ernst= >>> >>>P.S. >>> >>>Electronic preprints of my earlier publications on the relationship >>>between computing power and playing strength of chess programs are >>>available from http://supertech.lcs.mit.edu/~heinz/ and the WWW >>>pages of "DarkThought" at http://supertech.lcs.mit.edu/~heinz/dt/. >> >> >>The idea is ok, but I don't like the concept of playing program X vs itself >>with different depths. Your conclusion can easily be right for Fritz, but >>wrong for other programs... It would be hard to draw conclusions based on >>testing only one program that is known to be very fast but not very 'smart'. > >In my opinion, this thing about Fritz being "fast and dumb" is a common place >with little grounds. Fritz is certainly fast, but not more dumb than anything >else I know, including "smart" programs like Hiarcs, Rebel and Mchess. Since >these programs don't take advantage of their "knowledge" when playing the so >called "fast and dumb", we should start questioning their smartness. Same for >the way they all fall for anti-computer traps. Rather than fast versus clever, >what I see is variations on the same theme. > >Enrique I agree. Actually Fritz is no more so fast. E.g. LG2000 is much faster and even Junior is a little faster! Jouni
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.