Author: David Rasmussen
Date: 00:43:52 05/18/01
Go up one level in this thread
On May 17, 2001 at 17:50:11, Ralf Elvsén wrote: >> >>What you're saying isn't "true", it is just one interpretation of a question >>with some formal stuff (big O notatition) applied. And a very odd interpretation >>according to most people here. > >I think Jesper is concerned over the use of the O()-notation. If one >thinks chess scales exponentially with search depth in a "practical" >sense only, one should say "my-homemade-O(a^n)". > >Ralf What do you mean by "chess scales exponetially with search depth"? Chess is a game. How can it scale? And what does search depth has to do with chess? I haven't found anything about search depth in the FIDE rules. Search depth is an algorithmic concept. If we're talking about how the runtime of current central algorithms used in chess programs, they all scale exponetially. That is, the runtime is O(exp(n)) where n could be the search depth, in algorithms that _has_ such a concept. That's a perfectly stringent use of O notation. If you are talking about the "algorithm" Crafty, then it is certainly O(1), as is all other real programs that I know of. Jesper is misusing the O notation as much as anybody here.
This page took 0.01 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.