Author: Sune Fischer
Date: 03:46:48 10/04/01
Go up one level in this thread
On October 04, 2001 at 04:56:08, Uri Blass wrote: >The difference is that the other side(I and Bruce) do not say that they know >that there is a super linear improvement but that we cannot say that it is >impossible with the known algorithm of today. > >I said that the only way is to investigate the problem by test positions in >order to see if programs can get a super linear improvement from 2 processors. But that is not the only way, you can also use logic. This is like explaning to an inventor why he can't make a perpetuum mobile machine. If he doesn't understand the laws of physics, does not know of energy conservation, then he will keep arguing till the day he die, that "we can not know for certain until we have tried everything". We _do_ know, there is proof and Bob has outlined it several times, but if you won't listen or understand, then we have a communication problem. -S. > > > >Here are some cases when Deep Fritz changed it's mind after long search. >These positions are not good for tactical test suite and are only for Deep Fritz > >The last numbers are the depthes that Deep Fritz prefered the move when I >considered only the depth of finding the suggested move in the last time as >relevant depth > >17-20 means that deep fritz considered the move as best at depth 17-20 and did >not change it's mind at itearations 17-19 after finding the suggested move at >depth 17 >15,16-19 means that the sggested move was rejected at depth 15 only to be >considered aqain as best at depth 16. > >cases like 14 16-19 were not mentioned if they happened > >It may be interesting to compare Deep Fritz parallel search times >with deep Fritz not parallel search time(I am not sure if Deep Fritz is going to >find always the suggested move because different hash tables and parallel search >may cause some changes but I believe that it is going to find the suggested move >in most of the cases at the relevant depthes). > >1rb3k1/5pbp/6p1/1p2p3/8/1PPB2P1/4NP1P/5RK1 w - - 0 1 bm f4 17-20 >1rb3k1/5pbp/6p1/1p2p3/2P5/1P1B2P1/4NP1P/5RK1 b - - 0 1 bm Ba6 17-21 >2kr4/pppq1pp1/2nb1n2/3p4/5Pb1/2PPP2r/PP1BB1NP/R2QKN1R b KQ - 0 1 bm g5 19 >2kr4/ppp2p2/8/6P1/3p1P1q/2PP2Nr/PP1Q1K1n/6RR b - - 0 1 bm c5 17 >r2qkb1r/5pp1/p3p2p/8/1p1NP1n1/4B3/PPPQ3P/2KRR3 w kq - 0 1 bm Bf4 15,16-19 >r2qkb1r/5pp1/p3p2p/4n3/1p1NP1P1/4B3/PPPQ3P/2KRR3 b kq - 0 1 bm Nc4 18-19 >r2qkb1r/5pp1/p3p2p/8/1p1NPBn1/8/PPPQ3P/2KRR3 b kq - 0 1 bm g5 19 >r2qkb1r/5pp1/p6p/4p3/1p1NPBn1/8/PPPQ3P/2KRR3 w kq - 0 1 bm Qg2 19 >r4rk1/5pp1/1q2p2p/p1b1n3/1p1NP1P1/4B3/PPPRQ2P/1K1R4 b - - 0 1 bm Rfd8 18-19 >6k1/5pp1/r3p2p/p1b1n3/1p2P1PP/1N6/PPPB4/1K1R4 b - - 0 1 bm Be7 18-19 >r2r2k1/5pp1/1q2p2p/2b1n3/pp1NP1P1/4B2P/PPPRQ3/K2R4 b - - 0 1 bm Rd6 17 >r2r2k1/5pp1/1q2p2p/p1b1n3/1p1NP1PP/4B3/PPPRQ3/1K1R4 b - h3 0 1 bm Rd7 18-20 >r2r2k1/6p1/1q2pp1p/p1b1n3/1p1NP1P1/4B2P/PPPRQ3/1K1R4 w - - 0 1 bm b3 18 >6k1/5pp1/1q2p2p/8/pp2P1P1/4b2P/PPP5/1KBQ4 w - - 0 1 bm Qe1 18-20 >r2r2k1/5pp1/1q2p2p/2b1n1P1/p2NP3/1p2B2P/PPPRQ3/K2R4 b - - 0 1 bm hxg5 16-18 >2rr2k1/5pp1/1q2p2p/2b1n1P1/p2NP3/Pp2B2P/1PPRQ3/K2R4 b - - 0 1 bm Bxd4 14-19 >2rr2k1/5pp1/1q2p2p/4n3/p2NP1P1/PpP1B2P/3RQ3/K2R4 b - - 0 1 bm Qa5 17,18
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.