Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 06:20:46 03/30/01
Go up one level in this thread
On March 29, 2001 at 16:54:11, Rajen Gupta wrote: >On March 28, 2001 at 23:14:30, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On March 28, 2001 at 16:38:31, Rajen Gupta wrote: >> >>>chinook ckeckers, (the checkers equivalent of deep blue)is ready to face all >>>comers on its web site(admittedly a single processor version, but the same >>>software)why cant deep blue or even deep blue junior do the same? is it because >>>it is scared of being exposed for what it really is? >>> >>>rajen >> >> >>Why would they be afraid to expose it as an incredible chess-playing >>machine? Can't we figure that out from the Kasparov match? > > >perhaps not very incredible-may have just got lucky with a nervous kasparov and >may find the new ''deep programmes''a different cup of tea > >rajen It would be quite interesting for someone to take one of today's programs that can search 1M nodes per second, and play a match vs a 20 year old program that is given 1,000 times as much time per move. Do you _really_ think that a program of today would do all that well against (say) chess genius 2, with genius having a 1,000 time advantage? Today's programs would _not_ do well vs Deep Blue, any more than they did during the 10 years deep thought played chess actively. If you count all the losses by deep thought vs commercial programs, you only need 2 fingers. And you will have one left over.
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.