Author: Peter Kappler
Date: 21:31:57 07/17/00
Go up one level in this thread
On July 17, 2000 at 22:26:53, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On July 17, 2000 at 22:18:50, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On July 17, 2000 at 20:40:57, blass uri wrote: >> >>>On July 17, 2000 at 20:12:36, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>> >>>>On July 17, 2000 at 19:38:01, blass uri wrote: >>>> >>>>>On July 17, 2000 at 19:10:29, KarinsDad wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>On July 17, 2000 at 11:59:35, blass uri wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>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. >>>>>> >>>>>>You seem to be contradicting yourself. >>>>>> >>>>>>You are stating that the lack of the king safety failure due to the event >>>>>>horizon is not relevant and then turn around and state the DJ found out it was >>>>>>in trouble 4 ply later (once king safety failure was in scope of the event >>>>>>horizon). >>>>>> >>>>>>4 Ply is 6^4 or about 1300x faster hardware required. >>>>> >>>>>I disagree >>>>>computers can see 4 plies in the important lines often by being 50-100 times >>>>>faster or even less than it. >>>>> >>>>>The 4 plies are not quiet moves so I will not be surprised if being only 20 >>>>>times faster is enough. >>>>> >>>>> Or 2000x more processors. >>>>>>Event horizon for king safety is totally relevant here, otherwise, DJ would have >>>>>>probably played a different move. >>>>>> >>>>>>If I was a GM, I would attempt to add positional elements that the program would >>>>>>not detect until way later in the game such as permanent weaknesses for the >>>>>>program and permanent strengths for the GM. >>>>> >>>>>I agree that adding knowledge is important but my point was that I believe that >>>>>Deep Junior is better than Deeper blue based on equal numbers of nps >>>>> >>>>>Uri >>>> >>>> >>>>Based on what??? >>> >>>I think 5.5 out of 9 in this tournament is better than 3.5-2.5 against kasparov >>>inspite of the fact that 5.5 out of 9 is slightly worse performance because >>>kasparov could not train at home against something similiar to deeper blue when >>>the players in this tournament could train at home against something similiar to >>>Deep Junior that can produce almost the same moves. >>> >>>I think that Deep Junior could get 5.5 out of 9 with the same number of NPs as >>>Deeper blue because my Junior5.9 see the problem in the game against kramnik 4 >>>plies after the losing mistake and I guess that seeing more 4 plies that 3 of >>>them captures can be done with 200,000,000 nps. >>> >>>I also guess that Deep Junior has a chance to find 8.h4 that is probably >>>winning(based on alterman's words) against piket because the difference in >>>evaluation between this move and the game move was small. >>> >>>Junior had also good chances to translate the advantage in other games with >>>better hardware so I guess that it could get at least 5.5 out of 9 with the same >>>number of nps. >>> >>>Uri >> >> >>That is all well and good... But _what_ does it have to do with deep blue vs >>junior? By the time Junior can hit 200M, DB would be doing 400B nodes per >>second, assuming they wanted to continue development. So making comparisons >>between a deep junior that won't exist for about 10 years after the development >>of DB2 doesn't make a lot of sense... as there is no reason that DB2 would be >>the 'last' of the line, if they wanted to continue. >> >>Amir wasn't talking about being better than DB at 200M nodes per second, he >>seems to believe he is better at under 2M nps. That I have a very difficult >>time considering, even under the wildest of circumstances... > > >Here is a reasonable way of thinking about this: > >Let's take Dortmund and the DB97 match and consider the games. > >two questions: > >1. In the Deep Blue games, if you go over them, what serious weaknesses do >you see? Not the overlooked draw as _no_ program has ever come close to finding >that. In the 96 match, Kasparov found a problem and wore the machine out. In >1997 what did he find? > >2. In the Deep Junior games, if you go over them, what serious weaknesses do >you see? One obvious one is king safety. What do you think would have happened >had Dortmund been 12 rounds rather than 9? Did you notice a trend over the last >few games? Do you think that would have continued? > >Based on the above, I challenge you to justify any claim of equality or >superiority between DJ and DB97. I don't think there is any comparison at >all. DB outplayed Kasparov in blocked positions, in open positions, in >endgames Kasparov thought he should win, etc. I don't think DB outplayed Kasparov to the extent that you think. Certainly not in game 1. Yes, definitely in game 2. But in games 3-5, it was GK who had the better chances throughout. In those 3 games I think you have to give a slight edge to GK. Game 6 was clearly the worst game of his career, but it's not like it showcased any brilliant play by DB - it just was just a case of Garry suffering a total psychological breakdown and handing the game over. All that having been said, I do agree that DBs play in '97 was more impressive than DJs in Dortmund. --Peter
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.