Author: Tom Kerrigan
Date: 15:22:16 06/12/00
Go up one level in this thread
On June 12, 2000 at 17:08:35, Ricardo Gibert wrote: >On June 12, 2000 at 11:49:26, Tom Kerrigan wrote: > >>On June 11, 2000 at 22:18:41, Ricardo Gibert wrote: >> >>>On June 11, 2000 at 21:38:27, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>> >>>>On June 11, 2000 at 17:46:32, Ricardo Gibert wrote: >>>> >>>>>In the January/February issue of CiSE, there was published a list of 10 >>>>>algorithms having "the greatest influence on the development and practice of >>>>>science and engineering in the 20th century" . You can see this here: >>>>> >>>>>http://www.cecm.sfu.ca/personal/jborwein/algorithms.html >>>>> >>>>>Which I found this to be quite interesting, so naturally I wondered what the >>>>>membership of CCC thought were the Top 10 Computer Chess Algorithms & Techniques >>>>>having the greatest influence on the development and practice of Computer Chess. >>>>>I'll get things started with my Top 10 List: >>>>> >>>>>1. Alpha-Beta search Algotihm >>>>> >>>>>2. Iterative Deepening >>>>> >>>>>3. Transposition Tables >>>>> >>>>>4. Null Move Pruning >>>>> >>>>>5. Chess Game Databases (Chessbase) >>>>> >>>>>6. Ken Thompson's Endgame Tablebases >>>>> >>>>>7. Judea Pearl's Scout Algorithm >>>>> >>>>>8. Bitboards >>>>> >>>>>9. Tim Mann's Winboard >>>>> >>>>>10. Robert Hyatt's source listing of Crafty >>>>> >>>>>BTW, I've tried to place items in the list in order of importance. The first >>>>>four were easy, but I would expect a lot of disagreement in the next 6. In fact, >>>>>I disagree with myself here. It's not easy. Deep Blue ought to fit in there >>>>>somewhere. Also, I made a half-hearted attempt to include attribution, so any >>>>>additional information or corrections will be appreciated. >>>>> >>>>>I can't help but notice the absence of commercial programmers from my list, but >>>>>I think this is due to their keeping their methods "secret". History may >>>>>remember their programs, but credit them with few innovations. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>I would delete 5, 6, 7, 8 and 10. I don't think the source for Crafty has been >>>>an "important event". Gnuchess source has been out far longer, as has the >>>>source for other programs like Sargon, Cray Blitz, chess 4.x, who knows what >>>>else. >>> >>>Perhaps, but don't you I think your source has been more influential? Being >>>first isn't everything. How influential a work is must be factored in too. >> >>What do you mean by "influential"? Do you mean that people have copied code and >>algorithms from Crafty, i.e., cheated? I don't think this is such a great >>quality. > >I think what I mean by influential is deliberately ambiguous. I don't have a >strong opinion about items 5 - 10 in any case. So criticizing any of those does >not bother me. I really have no interest in the list _I_ generated. I just put >it out there as an example to help people come up with their own list. What I am >_really_ interested in is the list _other_ people come up with. I want to know >how _you_ think the word "influential" should be interpreted. > >So what would be your list? I think MacHack and CHESS deserve to be on the list... From what I understand, both programs shaped chess programming philosophy. -Tom
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.