Author: Chris Whittington
Date: 07:44:20 11/13/97
Go up one level in this thread
On November 13, 1997 at 10:14:35, Amir Ban wrote: >On November 13, 1997 at 07:13:03, Chris Whittington wrote: > > >>This is not directed specifically at Amir ....... >> > >Thanks for not directing anything specifically at me. > > >>I think the whole lot of you are avoiding the crucial issue from the >>games at WMCCC. >> >>The fast searchers, even with 767 alphas, were expected to sweep the >>board. Manifestly they didn't. >> >>Some other fast searchers, running on PC's also under-performed >>according to expectations. >> >>Several programs (ranging from very slow, to quite fast, but none of >>them brute monsters) were not even spoken about before the WMCCC as >>being of any interest, performed way above expectations. >> > >You need both speed and knowledge, unfortunately for some, but >fortunately for the field. Computer chess is interesting because it's so >damn hard. > >The IBM concept of playing 3-4 silly moves per game but still winning on >the strength of a gadzillion NPS was properly laid to rest in Hong-Kong >and in the 1st DB-GK match. > >On the other hand, playing against someone who outsearches you on every >move is a most unpleasant experience that is not good for your health. > >I thought there were some programs in Paris who played good chess >(Gandalf comes to mind), but just didn't have the horsepower to do >better. This is the old Hyatt chestnut of knowledge-speed trade-off. Knowledge is worth 1 or 2 or 3 or 4 or 5 plies or whatever. I'm not very happy with this concept. Sure knowledge has a hard time time when getting deeply outsearched; but the above concept is kind of one-dimensional. It assumes search to depth N for knowledge, and to depth N+x for speed; but its not like that, is it ? Knowledge can alter the shape of the tree, it can narrow the tree, it can build deep extensions, it can whatever. As we get cleverer, and as we get more safety from greater search space; we get a big payoff. Just my theory, and I'm sticking to it. Chris Whittington > >Amir
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.