Author: Dann Corbit
Date: 19:33:55 10/04/01
Go up one level in this thread
On October 04, 2001 at 21:47:46, Christophe Theron wrote:
>On October 04, 2001 at 17:15:18, Francesco Di Tolla wrote:
>
>>Neglecting the proablby important (bu not easy to interpret) effect of the
>>different CPU models, this is actually perfectly logic:
>>
>>Junior is a fast searcher and shredder has more knowledge.
>>
>>The faster the hardware that less important the extra search depth!
>>If you can reach say 20% more knodes this are a given amount of plys at a speed
>>an less plys at higher speed due to the nonlinear growth.
>>
>>So what's wrong?
>
>
>
>What's wrong is that if search tends to be less effective with increasing speed,
>actually "knowledge" (probably meaning "evaluation" in your mind) has exactly
>the same problem.
>
>In chess, Search <=> Knowledge
>
>I believe in dimishing returns from improved search, and I also believe in
>dimishing returns from improved knowledge ("improved evaluation").
As everyone knows, chess is O(exp(n)).
Suppose that by very intelligent pruning techniques, an algorithm [which was
expensive to compute] reduced the branching factor significantly. We might have
this situation:
Program 1:run time is k0 + k1 * exp(3*depth)
Program 2:run time is k2 + k3 * exp(2.5*depth)
Now, maybe k2 and k3 are enormous because of the complicated expressions needed
to accomplish the pruning. So when time control is short, program 1 will
clobber program 2. But if hardware gets fast enough, or if the time control is
long enough, then program 2 will eventually become unbeatable.
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.