Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: New crap statement ? Perpetuum mobile

Author: Dave Gomboc

Date: 15:01:49 10/04/01

Go up one level in this thread


On October 04, 2001 at 00:44:55, Uri Blass wrote:

>On October 04, 2001 at 00:28:35, Dave Gomboc wrote:
>
>>On October 04, 2001 at 00:11:37, Uri Blass wrote:
>>
>>>On October 03, 2001 at 18:53:31, Dave Gomboc wrote:
>>>
>>>>Observing that the parallel algorithm was super-linearly quicker immediately
>>>>gives rise to a superior sequential algorithm: alternate checking from the front
>>>>of the array and the back of the array for the zero.  It would quickly be
>>>>observed that the parallel algorithm does not have super-linear speedup over
>>>>this superior sequential algorithm.  In addition, the sequential algorithm may
>>>>be further optimized by ignoring the front of the array altogether, which would
>>>>reduce the parallel speedup further.
>>>>
>>>>To ignore the superior sequential algorithm and instead publish results
>>>>comparing only the original, poor sequential algorithm with the parallel
>>>>algorithm is not merely disingenuous but simply bad science.
>>>>
>>>>Dave
>>>
>>>The question here is a practical question.
>>>
>>>It is possible that the original sequential algorithm that chess programs use is
>>>a poor algorithm and this is the point of Bruce.
>>>
>>>Uri
><snipped>
>>And that point was already superseded weeks ago.  Both Bob and I have clearly
>>stated earlier that comparing a parallel algorithm against a _bad_ sequential
>>algorithm is useless.
>
>It is not useless because you may learn from it to improve the sequential
>algorithm.
>
>It is also possible that the programmer only cares about using more than one
>processor and in that case (s)he is not going to waste time about improving the
>sequential search.
>
>Uri

It is useless because you can learn from the parallel algorithm to improve the
sequential algorithm and there is no need to waste time reporting results
against a sequential algorithm that is known to be bad.

Dave



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.