Author: Uri Blass
Date: 22:45:32 04/18/01
Go up one level in this thread
On April 18, 2001 at 17:48:01, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: >On April 18, 2001 at 06:03:34, Uri Blass wrote: > >>On April 18, 2001 at 05:20:03, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: >> >>>On April 17, 2001 at 15:40:58, Uri Blass wrote: >>> >>>>Suppose program X is playing against kramnik. >>>> >>>>I think that it may be a good idea to generate a program that generates a tree >>>>and sends all the positions in the tree to people who want to help the computer >>>>in the match(I will call it the main program). >>>> >>>>The people give program X to analyze the position and return score and depth to >>>>the main program. >>>> >>>>The main program is using all the information about scores and depthes to decide >>>>about the best move. >>> >>>So a beginner rated 600 is very happy about a certain move, >>>and as a real patzer he returns infinite score for his move. >> >>Sorry but a beginner is not going to give information. >>Only program X is going to give depthes and score for positions and program X is >>a constant program. >> >>If program X is a preprocessor it should be changed to get not only a position >>to analyze but also to get the root position otherwise it is not going to >>analyze position from the same point of view. > >I see no advantages in parallellizing a true preprocessor, >but if you talk about wanting to parallellize a program, then it's >obvious that you need more as 1 cpu to speed it up! > >>Maybe you misunderstood me because you thought that program X is not a constant >>program because X means a variable. >>Maybe I should use the letter C to be more clear. > >If you talk about the same program which is going to get used to >parallellize a search tree in an SMP way, so not in an assymmetric way, >then you can look in some issues of ICCAJ and see a lot of different >ways to parallellize the searchtree! > >I don't need to mention that parallellizing over networks is harder to >generate a speedup as communications are more expensive, as that's very >obvious. > >The vaste majority of all computers at www.top500.org are going to be >slower as a 16 processor alpha with shared memory for sure, despite that >the first few machines each costed several billion US$ to build. > >The bandwidth on those machines is huge, so definitely there are going >to be algorithms that speed you up a lot after very hard work. > >You can of course also run parallel over the internet, but sometimes it >takes for me 10 minutes to just get connected to the internet. I thought about running parralel over the internet. > >If my program would be part of a crucial search tree, then obviously >sometimes you have 15 minutes delay for just a small part of the >search tree if you would want to wait 15 minutes for answer. > >The more costly communication is the smaller the speedup in general, >but in case of using internet connections the biggest problem isn't >even communication SPEED. It is the uncertainty of the communication >and the length of timeouts. > >How many plies must i let a program search? If i give each program 10 ply, >what timeout do i give it to let it finish before giving someone >else the same job? 1 minute? 2 minutes? Suppose this is a hard search tree >and that no free node (remote machine in this case) is able to search >the search tree in 2 minutes. I think that every program should get a task to search for a fixed time and not number of plies. You start with a program that generate a tree of 1000 nodes when it takes a short time(it may include the root position,all the positions 1 ply after the root,a big part of the positions 2 plies after the root(not including positions when a short search suggest that the line was illogical) and some extensions) You give every computer to analyze one position for 3 minutes. You get a score for every position and use the information of all the scores and depthes to decide about the move. You may send every position for 3 different computers if you are afraid you are not going to get a response because of connections problems. If the connection problems is on your side then it is a problem and you should use a computer that usually does not have a connection problem. Uri
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.