Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 18:54:16 05/04/01
Go up one level in this thread
On May 04, 2001 at 21:31:22, Uri Blass wrote: >On May 04, 2001 at 17:25:55, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On May 04, 2001 at 16:29:35, Uri Blass wrote: >> >>>On May 04, 2001 at 14:49:57, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>> >>>>On May 04, 2001 at 14:10:59, Uri Blass wrote: >>>> >>>>>On May 04, 2001 at 13:41:08, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>On May 04, 2001 at 13:33:55, Uri Blass wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>On May 04, 2001 at 13:20:51, Dann Corbit wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>On May 04, 2001 at 10:52:52, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>On May 03, 2001 at 21:03:58, Dann Corbit wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>On May 03, 2001 at 18:51:08, Eduard Nemeth wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> 12 54.72 -- 1. ... Qxa3 >>>>>>>>>> 12 2:00 -3.04 1. ... Qxa3 2. Bf6 Rfd8 3. Bxd8 Rxd8 >>>>>>>>>> 4. Rd1 Rd5 5. Qe4 g6 6. Qb4 Qa6 7. >>>>>>>>>> Qf4 >>>>>>>>>> 12-> 3:19 -3.04 1. ... Qxa3 2. Bf6 Rfd8 3. Bxd8 Rxd8 >>>>>>>>>> 4. Rd1 Rd5 5. Qe4 g6 6. Qb4 Qa6 7. >>>>>>>>>> Qf4 >>>>>>>>>> 13 3:43 -- 1. ... Qxa3 >>>>>>>>>> 13 5:06 0.00 1. ... Qxa3 2. Bf6 Rfc8 3. Bxg7 Kxg7 >>>>>>>>>> 4. Qf6+ Kf8 5. Rf1 Rc7 6. Bg6 Re8 7. >>>>>>>>>> Qh8+ Ke7 8. Qf6+ Kf8 >>>>>>>>>> 13 11:27 ++ 1. ... b4!! >>>>>>>>>> 13 13:05 -0.76 1. ... b4 2. cxb4 Qd5 3. Rf1 Rae8 4. >>>>>>>>>> Bf2 f5 5. exf6 Qxg2 6. Bd4 Rf7 7. Bxa7 >>>>>>>>>> Qd5 >>>>>>>>>> 13 13:40 ++ 1. ... Rfe8!! >>>>>>>>>> 13 14:40 -2.30 1. ... Rfe8 2. Rf1 Qf8 3. Qe4 g6 4. >>>>>>>>>> Kb2 Rec8 5. Bf6 Rc7 6. Qf4 Rd7 7. h4 >>>>>>>>>> a5 8. Be4 >>>>>>>>>> 13 15:40 -2.63 1. ... Rfc8 2. Qe4 g6 3. Rf1 Qf8 4. >>>>>>>>>> Kb2 Rc7 5. Qg4 c5 6. Bxb5 Rb8 7. g3 >>>>>>>>>> Be4 >>>>>>>>>> 13-> 16:21 -2.63 1. ... Rfc8 2. Qe4 g6 3. Rf1 Qf8 4. >>>>>>>>>> Kb2 Rc7 5. Qg4 c5 6. Bxb5 Rb8 7. g3 >>>>>>>>>> Be4 >>>>>>>>>> time=16:39 cpu=100% mat=-3 n=596994678 fh=91% nps=597k >>>>>>>>>> ext-> chk=29940411 cap=1174947 pp=514823 1rep=4254557 mate=419833 >>>>>>>>>> predicted=0 nodes=596994678 evals=102285376 >>>>>>>>>> endgame tablebase-> probes done=0 successful=0 >>>>>>>>>>Black(1): quit >>>>>>>>>>execution complete. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>Mine looks a bit different on the quad. 2:18 to drop Qxa3. Note that I used >>>>>>>>>hash=192M for the run... >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> 12 38.66 -- 1. ... Qxa3 >>>>>>>>> 12 1:27 -1.65 1. ... Qxa3 2. Bf6 Rfc8 3. Bxg7 Kxg7 >>>>>>>>> 4. Qf6+ Kf8 5. Bg6 Rc7 6. Rf1 Re8 7. >>>>>>>>> Qh8+ Ke7 8. Rxf7+ Kd8 9. Qxe8+ Kxe8 >>>>>>>>> 10. Rxc7+ Kd8 11. Rxb7 Qxc3 12. Rxa7 >>>>>>>>> Qxe5 >>>>>>>>> 12 2:18 ++ 1. ... a5!! >>>>>>>>> 12 3:39 -2.57 1. ... a5 2. Bf6 Rfc8 3. Qg4 Qf8 4. >>>>>>>>> Qe4 g6 5. Kb2 Qc5 6. Rd1 Ra6 7. Qf4 >>>>>>>>> 12 4:07 -2.58 1. ... Rfb8 2. Qe4 g6 3. Rf1 Qf8 4. >>>>>>>>> Kb2 c5 5. Qg4 g5 6. Bf2 c4 7. Be2 >>>>>>>>> (4) 12-> 4:18 -2.58 1. ... Rfb8 2. Qe4 g6 3. Rf1 Qf8 4. >>>>>>>>> Kb2 c5 5. Qg4 g5 6. Bf2 c4 7. Be2 >>>>>>>>> (3) 13 5:25 -2.52 1. ... Rfb8 2. Kb2 Rc8 3. Rf1 Rc7 4. >>>>>>>>> Qe4 g6 5. Rxf7 Rxf7 6. Qxg6+ Kf8 7. >>>>>>>>> Qxh6+ Kg8 8. Qg6+ Rg7 9. Qxe6+ Rf7 >>>>>>>>> 13 7:40 -2.54 1. ... Rfc8 2. Rf1 Qf8 3. Qe4 g6 4. >>>>>>>>> Kb2 Rc7 5. Bf6 c5 6. Qg4 c4 7. Be2 >>>>>>>>> Rd7 8. h4 >>>>>>>>> 13 8:00 -2.55 1. ... Rfe8 2. Kb2 Rab8 3. Rd1 Qf8 >>>>>>>>> 4. Qe4 g6 5. Bf6 c5 6. Qg4 c4 7. Be2 >>>>>>>>> Qc5 >>>>>>>>> (3) 13-> 8:00 -2.55 1. ... Rfe8 2. Kb2 Rab8 3. Rd1 Qf8 >>>>>>>>> 4. Qe4 g6 5. Bf6 c5 6. Qg4 c4 7. Be2 >>>>>>>>> Qc5 >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>I will have some 64-cpu alpha numbers in a month or two. Working on a port >>>>>>>>>to use UPC right now... Compaq is loaning me a single-cpu alpha to compile/test >>>>>>>>>on with the target of a 64 cpu machine they have. I will try to get it on to >>>>>>>>>ICC on a weekend maybe... Or maybe for the next CCT. :) >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>Prophecy: >>>>>>>>You will win the next WCCC[*] >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>[*] Unless someone else does the same port. There is no other machine that even >>>>>>>>comes close. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>I am not so sure that it is enough to win. >>>>>>>In the last 2 WCCC tournament the biggest hardware did not win. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Deep thought failed to win in 1995(Fritz3 was the champion) >>>>>>>Deep Junior,Deep Fritz,Ferret failed to win in 1999 and Shredder won. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Uri >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>In the last two WCCC's there were no programs that were _really_ searching >>>>>>at 60M nodes per second either. :) >>>>> >>>>>Yes but in the WCCC of 1995 Fritz was also clearly slower and I also believe in >>>>>diminishing returns so 2M against 60M is not the same as >>>>>0.1M against 3M. >>>>> >>>>>Uri >>>> >>>> >>>>I don't believe in "diminishing" returns when it is computer vs computer. Give >>>>me that extra ply _any_ day. It will swing the match in my favor if my opponent >>>>and I are equal at equal search depths. >>> >>>I believe in diminishing returns between different programs for the same reason >>>that diminishing return may happen in comp-human games. >>> >>>At small depthes tactics dominates so the 30 times fastesr program usually wins. >>> >>>At big depthes there are things that one program understands and the second >>>program does not understand when depth is not going to help. >>> >>>If 2 different programs have different positional weaknesses then the slower >>>program has practical chances to win at big depthes. >>> >>>Uri >> >> >> >>OK... then at _today's_ computer speeds, I don't believe in diminishing >>returns yet. In 20 years, perhaps. But the difference between a 15 ply >>search and a 17 ply search is _significant_ still. Lots of experiments have >>shown that diminishing returns don't appear to happen at any depth we can >>reach today, even using 24 hours of computer time. > >The only valid experiment is games and I do not know about games between depth >15 and depth 17. > >Uri Didn't Ed do something similar in his "chess 2010" experiment? Until I begin to see games where I can't find a place where going deeper would have made a difference, I won't buy "diminishing returns". Sometimes a factor of 2 on one position would be game-deciding...
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.