Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 19:53:47 09/13/01
Go up one level in this thread
On September 13, 2001 at 17:26:21, K. Burcham wrote: > > >Question for Dr Hyatt: in the final position, Joel Benjamin said deep blue > eval was close to +2.00. shredder5 finds 45...Qe3 in 30 seconds with > 1500 mhz. eval starts out at +1.88, with shredder5, and drops quickly. >in 3 minutes shredder5 eval drops to +1.40. in 15 minutes shredder5 eval >drops to +1.26. i do not understand how deep blue eval can be +2.00. Two things. 1. We have seen several positions where shredder says +5 and other programs say +2. There is therefore nothing to say that there are not also positions where shredder will say +2 and other programs will say +5. This fairly small difference in evaluations is hard to speculate on. IE it is possible that DB used DT's pawn=1.28, which means a score of +2 is roughly 1.5 pawns ahead. I don't really know here... >deep fritz and GT2.0 are similiar in this 45...Qe3 eval. if deep blue >was so far ahead of these rpograms in kns, it seems in this final position >that deep blue eval should be somewhat lower than +2.00 for 45...Qe3, >you would think in this position deep blue could see the drawn position > of 45...Qe3. and if you say it could see the draw, then why did Joel > say eval was close to +2.00. It couldn't see the draw. We already know that the draw requires a search of 60 plies to reach the longest forced drawing position. I don't think any program is capable of that in this position. Don't forget my comment about the value of a pawn. Some programs use .75, some use 1.00, and DT even used 1.28. You can't compare evaluations from programs that vary the value of a pawn (material score only) that much. 2*.75=1.5, 2*1.28 =2.56. etc... > > >thanks >kburcham
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.