Author: Chris Carson
Date: 11:16:34 07/14/00
Go up one level in this thread
On July 14, 2000 at 13:55:23, blass uri wrote: >On July 14, 2000 at 09:29:13, Chris Carson wrote: > >>. > >Explanation: > >Deep Junior is commercial and the players got a version that is almost the same >and can produce almost all the moves in the games. > >Kasparov could not buy something that produce most of the moves of Deep blue,so >the result of Deep Junior is better even if Deep Junior's performance is >slightly lower than the performance of Deep Blue(96). > >I also believe that Deep Junior is better than Deeper Blue if you assume the >same number of nodes per second(It means that Deep Junior is 50-100 times >faster). > >I believe that the quality of the knowledge in the evaluation function of Deep >Junior is better than the quality of the knowledge of Deeper blue's evaluation >function. > >It is possible that Deeper Blue had more knowledge but the quality of knowledge >is important and not the quantity. > >Uri I agree with you. IBM set out to beat Kasparov and di so in the second match. However, Deep Junior has played a variety of Super GM's and done at least as well with only a fraction of the hardware advantage. Create ASIC's from DJ source and you would would have a very scary monster. :) Best Regards, Chris Carson
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.