Author: Slater Wold
Date: 12:37:52 11/13/01
Go up one level in this thread
On November 13, 2001 at 13:02:34, Joshua Lee wrote: >I have seen many argue this point weather or not DB had much in the way of >intellegence which makes no sense do you really think that IBM would risk just >having a node cruncher? Don't you think that Someone on the DB team would >explain how there are many positions where brute force wouldn't work even if >every cpu in the world were connected together? > >What technigues Can be used together and on micros? Has anyone tried to make >their program more like this enigma? > >Here's what i found: > >sophisticated quiescence search > - endgame heuristics > - a few small endgame databases > - position repetition detection > - calculates mobility > - evaluates space > - close to 50 tables to evaluate a chess move > (implied that this includes: > piece square tables > pawn bitmaps > open file > coefficient updates after each move (incremental evaluation) > >Deep Blue can recognize (in hardware) approximately 6,000 >chess-specific features DB's features were 75% hardware and 25% software. With a micro, they have to be 100% software. Hence the catch on trying to make something "like" it. DB was the last chess "super computer". Chess software is made to make money, or as a hobby. Chess hardware is made to spend money, and lots of it. Although DT I only cost about $5,000. Less than *most* servers now. A LOT less than Hyatt's quad 700. (A 700mhz Xeon CPU is about $1,300 right now. That's $5,200 just in CPU's.)
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.