Author: Uri Blass
Date: 08:17:44 05/12/01
Go up one level in this thread
On May 12, 2001 at 10:54:42, Joshua Lee wrote: >>>The fact that deep blue played a different move does not prove nothing. >>>Both Rxc6 and bxc6 are losing moves and different extensions can encourage a >>>program to play a different move. >>> >>>We do not have the logfile of deep blue from these games so we can know nothing >>>about the line that Deep blue saw and if it changed it's mind from Rxc6 to bxc6 >>>so it seem that using this position to compare between the first Deep Blue and >>>the commercial programs is useless. >>> >>>Uri >> >> >>That's why I asked. First, DB1 had several shortcomings that were addressed >>in the new chip used in DB2. Second we had no output from DB1 as you said, >>so there is no way to know what it saw and what the eval was (of course, for >>DB2 it is not easy to know what it saw either since it can not display all >>(or even most) of the PVs. > > >This Comes close to giving me an answer, I don't understand how exactly Deep >Blue 1 goes for the so called worse move but Fritz goes for the other even if >you let it think to the same amount of nodes. Different programs have different evaluation function so you can learn nothing. It is not a case when one move is clearly forced so a different evaluation function can explain everything. I know from experience in my correspondence games that different programs may play different moves in all time control. There was one case when Deep fritz played move A and did not change it's mind(unless you count the first plies) when Gandalf played move B and also did not change it's mind. GambitTiger2 played move A but after almost an hour changed it's mind to move C. and stick into move C in the next plies. The programs searched for a lot of hours in all the cases. 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.