Author: Sune Fischer
Date: 07:36:51 02/07/02
Go up one level in this thread
On February 07, 2002 at 10:20:41, Dann Corbit wrote: >On February 07, 2002 at 10:15:59, Sune Fischer wrote: >[snip] >>>The previous studies also showed that. The real question is whether 16-18 plies >>>has less benefit compared to 18-20 plies. The reason I say that would be >>>obvious if you look at the graphs of the studies. >> >>I think any effect out there will be hard to measure, the curve is just too >>straight. >>Compare 2-3 to 15-16 and I'm sure you will see the effect clearly. > >I don't think that has ever been in question. The notion of diminishing returns >is only interesting if they continue to diminish. So (for instance) if after 20 >plys, you always get exactly 10% improvements, then the returns are not >diminishing from that point forward. > >The only unanswered question is "do the returns of an additional ply continue to >become less and less?" > >Every study I have ever seen shows that the initial plies are move valuable. In >fact, it's nothing but common sense. Well then you can almost prove it by induction. I think you will be hard pressed to measure any thing that deep. If 15-16 plies is 45-55% lose-win, then 16-17 plies may result in 45.3-54.7% and 17-18 in 45.5-54.5% etc. converging to 50-50% at plies 338-339 :) Those are very small effects that you are _expected_ to find, they will simply not be visible because of the uncertainties, how do you expect to find 0.2% difference? You need to zoom in on this effect by comparing 6-7 plies to 16-17 plies. -S.
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.