Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 15:40:44 05/23/01
Go up one level in this thread
On May 23, 2001 at 18:31:20, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On May 23, 2001 at 15:48:27, Uri Blass wrote: > >>On May 23, 2001 at 13:46:30, Robert Hyatt wrote: >> >>>On May 23, 2001 at 11:55:29, Bruce Moreland wrote: >>> >>>>On May 22, 2001 at 13:07:29, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>>> >>>>>Rh5 seems better although I couldn't get DB Jr's score of +1.5 in any reasonable >>>>>time (two hours or so). >>>>> >>>>>I guess this leads to Uri's question (again) of "does Bxg7 actually win or >>>>>not?" >>>> >>>>My program liked Bxg7 in a minute or two, with a score of around +1, but it is >>>>speculative. >>>> >>>>It has not been tuned for this position. It had Bg7 Kg7 Ne5 and I don't >>>>remember what all after that. >>>> >>>>I went out for a while and when I came back it had Rh5 with a fail-high. This >>>>morning it is at +1.24, same thing. >>>> >>>>I'll leave it running for a day or two and see what happens. >>>> >>>>bruce >>> >>> >>>It seems obvious that all the programs like Rh5. The worry is that this is >>>a possibly bad move on a deep enough search, although I don't believe this >>>myself (yet). >>> >>>Kasparov seems to think that Bg7 is best. But when he says 'best' I am not >>>sure what that means, exactly. IE 'forced win'? 'good prospects'? Etc. And >>>of course he _could_ easily be wrong, although I would tend to not think this >>>is the normal case... >>> >>>Your 1.24 is getting closer to DB Jr's score than mine reached, although I >>>didn't let it run overnight. Think I will crank it up and let it burn for >>>a while myself... >> >>Interesting also to know how much time per position does Crafty need to get 11 >>out of 13(I say 11 out of 13 and not out of 14 because it seems that the Bxg7 is >>not correct so I do not count this position as a good test suite unless the >>solution is Rh5). > >I will try to crank it up and let it run. I could start at 1 hour per position, >and then for the ones it misses, go to 4 or 8 to see what happens. No idea >how hard this will be to do as I start at 6 after 20 minutes and there is a long >way to go to reach 11. > > > >> >>I believe that Deep Fritz on slower hardware can get something like 7 or 8 out >>of 13 on PIII450(20 minutes per position). >> >>It could solve 1-5,7,8 but I did not give it enough time to find if it is going >>to change it's mind in all of these cases. >> >>It could also find the right move in 9 but changed it's mind and it seem to fail >>to solve it because of null move problems. >> >>It changed it's mind after more than 20 minutes on PIII450 so I may consider it >>as solved on pIII450(20 minutes per position) > >Note that the original test was for 15 minutes per position if my instructions >were correct... > > >> >>I did some analysis and found that later in the tree after Rd6 Rxd6 Nxd6+ Kd7 >>Nb5 Ng7 h6 Deep Fritz has fail low,fail high, fail low, fail high... and can >>never see things that Crafty has no problem to see. >> >>It is clearly a null move problem for Fritz because if I put selectivity=0 it >>does not show the same problem. >> >> >> >> >>The information of the results of deep blue Junior does not prove that Deep blue >>was really better in tactics than the top programs of today because of the >>following reasons: >> >>1)Tactics in games is different than tactics in test suites and a program can be >>better at test suites when it fails to see tactics in games. > >Would never argue. I never used test suites to draw conclusions about them. >But it is useful to have a well-known position that everybody can search and >compare to their results, just for comparison's sake. > > > >> >>2)It is possible that there are some software improvement in Deep blue Junior >>and that the deep blue Junior that was tested is better than the deeper blue >>that played against kasparov. >> >> > >No Idea there. Anything is possible. The hardware is certainly the DB2 stuff, >but as Hsu said, they were using less than 50% of the new evaluation hardware >he added in the last revision of the chip, so there is obviously lots of room >to add stuff. > >Bob I am running it at 2 hours per position (first cut) on a quad 550. Should have some results by this time tomorrow roughly... I did tell it that if it had the right move for 3 consecutive iterations, to stop searching on that position, to speed it up a bit... More later.
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.