Author: Uri Blass
Date: 14:26:52 04/23/01
Go up one level in this thread
On April 23, 2001 at 15:39:22, Christophe Theron wrote: >On April 23, 2001 at 15:00:23, Uri Blass wrote: > >>On April 23, 2001 at 13:46:02, Christophe Theron wrote: >> >>>On April 23, 2001 at 02:43:23, Uri Blass wrote: >>> >>>>On April 23, 2001 at 02:17:26, Tanya Deborah wrote: >>>> >>>>>On April 22, 2001 at 12:29:34, Uri Blass wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>Tiger14(depth 3)-Deep Fritz(depth 3) 16.5-3.5 >>>>>>Tiger14(depth 4)-Deep Fritz(depth 4) 7.5-12.5 >>>>>>Tiger14(depth 5)-Deep Fritz(depth 5) 13-7 >>>>>>Tiger14(depth 6)-Deep Fritz(depth 6) 14-6 >>>>>>Tiger14(depth 7)-Deep Fritz(depth 7) 13.5-6.5 >>>>>>Tiger14(depth 8)-Deep Fritz(depth 8) 10.5-9.5 >>>>>>Tiger14(depth 9)-Deep Fritz(depth 9) 14-6 >>>>>>Tiger14(depth 10)-Deep Fritz(depth 10) 9.5-10.5 >>>>>> >>>>>>Tiger14(depth 4)-Deep Fritz(depth 3) 17.5-2.5 >>>>>>Tiger14(depth 5)-Deep Fritz(depth 4) 19-1 >>>>>>Tiger14(depth 6)-Deep Fritz(depth 5) 18-2 >>>>>>Tiger14(depth 7)-Deep Fritz(depth 6) 15-5 >>>>>> >>>>>>Tiger14(depth 3)-Deep Fritz(depth 4) 6-14 >>>>>> >>>>>>Tiger14(depth 4)-Deep Fritz(depth 5) 8-12(this result should be 12.5-7.5 but >>>>>>deep fritz failed to mate because of having only part of the tablebases and the >>>>>>engines agreed to a draw in a position that the evaluation was mate against >>>>>>tiger). >>>>>> >>>>>>Tiger14(depth 5)-Deep Fritz(depth 6) 7-13 >>>>>>Tiger14(depth 6)-Deep Fritz(depth 7) 8-12 >>>>>>Tiger14(depth 7)-Deep Fritz(depth 8) 7-13 >>>>>> >>>>>>The advantage of one ply seems to be very significant in the nunn match and you >>>>>>can see that the side that searched deeper won in all the matches. >>>>>> >>>>>>Deep Fritz at depth X seems to be 100 about elo better than Tiger at depth X-1 >>>>>>when Tiger14 at depth X seems to be more than 200 elo better than Tiger14. >>>>>> >>>>>>It means that at small depthes 1 ply is probably worth at least 150 elo rating >>>>>>for the nunn match. >>>>>>There is of course a significant statistical error and we need more games. >>>>>> >>>>>>Uri >>>>> >>>>>Very interesting Uri! >>>> >>>>Here are more results >>>>Tiger14(depth 8)-Deep Fritz(depth 7) 14-6 >>>>Deep Fritz(depth 9)-Tiger14(depth 8) 12.5-7.5 >>>>Tiger14(depth 9)-Deep Fritz(depth 8) 8.5-1.5(this match was not finished because >>>>I stopped it in the middle) >>>> >>>>> >>>>>But how did you make that Fritz move when it is on depth4 or 5 ?? >>>>>I believe that many of this games (at depth 3,4,or5) take only a few seconds. >>>>>Is this right? >>>> >>>>Correct games at these depthes takes only few seconds so I could finish the nunn >>>>match at small depthes in few minutes. >>>> >>>>I have some more results at small depthes(this time of Gambittiger2 against Deep >>>>Fritz >>>> >>>>Gambit2(depth 3)-Deep Fritz(depth 3) 8.5-11.5 >>>>Gambit2(depth 4)-Deep Fritz(depth 4) 10.5-9.5 >>>>Gambit2(depth 5)-Deep Fritz(depth 5) 13-7 >>>>Gambit2(depth 6)-Deep Fritz(depth 6) 12-8 >>>> >>>>Gambit2(depth 3)-Deep Fritz(depth 4) 4.5-15.5 >>>>Gambit2(depth 4)-Deep Fritz(depth 3) 16.5-3.5 >>>>Gambit2(depth 4)-Deep Fritz(depth 5) 9.5-10.5 >>>>Gambit2(depth 5)-Deep Fritz(depth 4) 17-3 >>>> >>>>You can see that the Deeper searcher at shallow depthes is always winning the >>>>match if you use tiger and fritz. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>>>If the program using a 8x procesor machine against Kramnink, see one ply more >>>>>than the normal fast machine, how strong will be ?? in elo?? >>>> >>>>I do not know. >>>> >>>>I believe in diminishing return and the results seem to suggest diminishing >>>>return but I need more games to prove it stattistically. >>>> >>>>Uri >>>>> >>>>>Tanya. >>> >>> >>> >>>Go on Uri, that's interesting. >>> >>> >>> >>> Christophe >> >>I will continue. >> >>Unfortunately I am not going to give more than few hours per day of computer >>time for it because I use my computer for other purposes. >> >>No news from the last update. >> >>I think to include >>Tiger14,Gambit2,Deep Fritz, Crafty at depth 3-10 >> >>I think to play only matches between different programs when the difference >>in depth is at most 3 and it is going to give for every player: >>420 games for depth 6,7 >>360 games for depth 5,8 >>300 games for depth 4,9 >>240 games for depth 3,10 >> >>This process may take some months because of the fact that I am not going to use >>more than few hours per day and I do not promise to use the computer every day >>for this purpose. >> >>I am afraid games when the difference in depth is more than 3 are going to end >>often with the result 20-0 and this is the reason that I am not going to play >>them(we already had 19-1 result when the difference was only 1). >> >>Other people probably can reproduce similiar results but not exactly the same >>results because they probably do not have exactly the same set of tablebases >>that I have. >> >>Uri > > > >I think that a difference of 1 and 2 plies is more than enough to give >significant results. You can save the additional work with 3 plies differences. > >I suggest that you do not use tablebases. TB are the same thing as an infinite >search, so it breaks your rule of fixed depths. I understand Unfortunately I used tablebases in the first games so I need to repeat the games that I did in order to be consistant. Fortunately I did not play most of the games that are planned so I do not need to repeat most of them. I guess there is not going to be a big difference but I am going to do it. I expect that not using tablebases is going to help the deeper searchers. 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.