Author: blass uri
Date: 08:18:50 07/18/00
Go up one level in this thread
On July 18, 2000 at 11:05:03, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On July 18, 2000 at 00:31:57, Peter Kappler wrote: > >>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 > > >I wouldn't begin to claim that DB "outplayed" kasparov in 97. I do claim that >it "beat" him, of course. :) > >But in the above, the point is can you find any specific weakness in DB that >would lead to GMs discovering that and beating it like a drum? Can you find >any weakness in Deep Junior that would lead to GMs discovering that and beating >it like a drum? > >That is the main difference I see. We _all_ saw the king safety/blocked >position problem in Dortmund. We didn't see any such problem in DB'97. It does not prove that the evaluation of DB'97 was better about king safety. I guess that with 200M nps Junior could find better moves and avoid the king attacks in the games. I found that my Junior5.9 could find 9.Bh6 to trade the bishops instead of 9.Bg5 and with this move I suspect that piket can have problems with the king and not Junior I also found that in the game against kramnik Junior5.9 can start to see problems 4 plies after the mistake Kh8. 3 out of these 4 moves are capture so I guess that with 200M nps Junior has good chances to avoid Kh8. 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.