Author: blass uri
Date: 08:59:35 07/17/00
Go up one level in this thread
On July 17, 2000 at 09:32:18, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On July 17, 2000 at 08:05:57, blass uri wrote: > >>On July 17, 2000 at 07:22:41, Graham Laight wrote: >> >>>I'm afraid I still feel that Junior could have come out ahead (instead of >>>level)in this tournament by beating Bareev and Khalifman - and possibly by not >>>losing with such apparent ease to Kramnik. Continuing the game against Anand >>>might possibly have gained an extra half point as well. >>> >>>I think that Amir has an aspiration to make his program demonstably better than >>>Deep Blue (this certainly comes across in his interviews published on the >>>Chessbase Website coverage of Dortmund (www.chessbase.com) before the Kramnik >>>game). If so, as a (hopefully!) impartial member of the viewing public, I'm >>>afraid to say that I've yet to be convinced. >>> >>>As evidence, I point firstly to the games against Bareev and Khalifman. On both >>>occasions when Deep Blue '97 gained an advantage over Gary Kasparov (who's a >>>better player than anyone at Dortmund was), it parlayed that advantage into >>>victory - whilst Deep Junior twice failed conspicuously to "slam in the lamb". >>> >>>I would also point to the game against Khalifman. Here we see Deep Junior lose >>>to a combination of blocked centre and king attack - classic anti computer >>>methods which have both been well known for a long time. They work because, in >>>this case, nothing short of truly massive search depth is going to help you to >>>make the correct moves. >>> >>>However, for both king attack and blocked centre, Deep Blue '97 demonstrated >>>that it's evaluation knowledge was able to adequately handle the challenge. >> >> >>I guess that the evaluation of Deep Junior could do better if Deep Junior could >>search the same number of nodes. >> >>I believe that Deep Junior is better than Deeper blue if you assume 200,000,000 >>nodes per second for deep Junior. >> >>Uri > > >I believe pigs can fly. But only if you increase the density of the atmosphere >by a factor of 10,000 or so. > >DB has two almost insurmountable advantages: (1) it is faster than anything is >going to be for a _long_ time; (2) using special-purpose hardware they did >everything in the eval that was suggested by GM players, because they could do >so with no speed penalty. Deeper blue had one significant disadvantage. They had no time to test their evaluation. DJ and every other PC program has _many_ >"concessions" in the evaluation due to speed considerations. DJ's king safety >would fail if it was 1,000 times faster... because there are some things that >speed won't help until we reach the point where the computer can see 30-50 plies I think that these things are not relevant in the games that it lost. I think that in the game against kramnik the mistake of deep Junior was Kh8 and Deep Junior could see 4 plies after it that it is in trouble. I believe alterman that in the game against piket Deep Junior could get a winning advantage in the opening and with faster hardware it could probably find the right move that open the position. I agree that there were later in the game positions that it does not understand even if you do the software 1000 times faster but it is not relevant after avoiding the error at move 8. Uri
This page took 0.01 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.