Author: Jesper Antonsson
Date: 14:29:58 11/23/01
Go up one level in this thread
On November 23, 2001 at 14:31:39, Uri Blass wrote: >I do not see a reason to assume that intuitively there is diminishing return if >you play the program against itself when you have not diminishing returns when >you play with different programs. Well, I think there should be diminishing returns regardless of what combinations of programs you use. I'm sorry if I haven't followed the discussion closely, but are you claiming that you have data that says otherwise? Could you point me to it or repeat it, please? >Suppose that you have a game when half of the positions A does not understand >and half of the positions B does not understand. > >At small depthes tactics is going to dominate so more plies are going to help >between A and B. > >At big depthes in half of the cases A is going to lose the positions that it >does not understand and in the second half B is going to lose the positions that >it does not understand and you are going to get 50%. Understanding is a function of the depth you reach and the eval. On the average, any program understands less if you give it less depth, and there is diminishing returns if you give it more. >The depth is not going to be important because at every depth that is smaller >than 30 plies and bigger than 10 plies the program that does not understand the >position is not going to have enough depth to solve the problem by search. That doesn't make sense. Every extra ply between 10 and 30 and above will make the program gain "understanding" of some positions. Jesper
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.