Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Coparing two Identical Programs using Different Processors Speed !

Author: Severi Salminen

Date: 14:00:30 01/28/01

Go up one level in this thread


>It is very strange. Chess programs are all using, more or less, the same basic
>principles. So the logical way is to assume that they all benefit more or less
>equally from faster hardware. But I have never seen anybody supporting this
>assumption. Instead of trying to demonstrate that this simple assumption is
>wrong, everybody just assumes that it is wrong. Why?
>
>I guess the answer is that it is more fun to assume that all chess programs do
>not benefit from faster hardware in the same way. So people believe that by
>changing the hardware or the time controls big surprises can happen...
>
>On the other hand it is always hard to explain that in short matches big
>surprises can happen FOR NO REASON.
>
>So people tend to draw flawed conclusions based mainly on their beliefs, and to
>present them as scientifical evidence...

This all is result of human nature. We want to understand things we don't
understand. We want to create our own set of rules in order to forecast complex
systems. Same in computer chess: people love to see different characteristics in
different programs (Gambit Tiger is a brave attacker, Hiarcs plays positional
chess, Fritz tactical...). They want to see these "new paradigms" and want to
categorize programs' behaviour based on a few games. They want to see a
human-like behaviour. And it also looks like the people who make these
conclusions are usually not programmers (IMO :). And I don't blame them. It is
impossible to know how chess engines _really_ function unless you have tried it
out yourself. And for marketing point of view it would be quite boring if all
engines were presented as little modifications of same principles that have been
around 30 years, wouldn't it. I wouldn't be suprised if Fritz and Junior were
actually the same engine :)

The point: let them have their paradigms and let us have our scientifical facts.
We can filter the useful inforamtion out. In this case maybe 500 games could not
be enough to show anything - if there is anything to show.

Severi



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.