Author: Uri Blass
Date: 22:19:27 01/30/02
Go up one level in this thread
On January 30, 2002 at 23:21:35, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On January 30, 2002 at 12:52:14, Ed Schröder wrote: > >>On January 30, 2002 at 09:43:49, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: >> >>>Hello, >>> >>>I would like to adress some major nonsense about search depth >>>deep blue. >>> >>>First of all, we know that deep blue was doing only fullwidth >>>with loads of extensions. >>> >>>a) 12(6) doesn't mean they searched 18 ply. It means they searched >>> 12 plies fullwidth from which 6 ply in hardware >> >>Agreed Vincent. 18 plies brute force is impossible. 12 plies brute force fits. >> >>Ed >> > > > >based on what? > >Cray Blitz, using null-move R=1, non-recursive (one null move along any >path, period, which made the search go about 25% faster overall was quite >capable of searching 12 plies. It searched 10 plies at 200K nodes per >second. DB was only 1000 times faster. Could it _really_ only search >2 plies deeper? > >I don't think so... I believe that it could search 4 plies deeper from being 1000 times faster but it also gives only 14 plies. If you remember that Deeper blue did more extensions than Cray blitz then it is possible to understand 12 plies. Uri
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.