Author: Uri Blass
Date: 14:57:42 09/12/01
Go up one level in this thread
On September 12, 2001 at 17:04:13, Dann Corbit wrote: >On September 12, 2001 at 16:07:45, Uri Blass wrote: >[snip] >>I think that your program understands the position better than >>Deeper blue. >> >>It is more logical to assume that Deeper blue is wrong and not that >>all the top programs are wrong. > >Try all the top programs on this one: >2b5/1r6/2kBp1p1/p2pP1P1/2pP4/1pP3K1/1R3P2/8 b - - bm Rb4; id "WAC.230"; > >6 billion votes "AYE!" >1 vote "NAY." > >The one vote may be right, and the 6 billion wrong. >[snippity-snip] I remember that there was a discussion about this position and it was not clear if Rb4 wins. I do not say that the majority is always right but I tend to believe the majority if I have no evidence that it is wrong and in the case of the draw against kasparov in game 2 I tend to believe that programs see 0.00 some plies after the root for the right reason. program of today also can find Qe3 when programs like Genius3 could not do it so I tend to believe that deeper blue's evaluation is similiar to some old programs that cannot find Qe3 and not to the new programs. I also tend to believe that the new programs are better than the old programs and the fact that they can find Qe3 (even without 0.00 evaluation) when old programs like Genius3 or Deeper blue cannot do it is not luck. The new programs are simply better. They have better search rules and better evaluation function. 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.