Author: Sune Fischer
Date: 02:40:15 02/11/02
Go up one level in this thread
On February 11, 2002 at 05:19:08, Uri Blass wrote: >On February 11, 2002 at 04:25:46, Sune Fischer wrote: > >>On February 10, 2002 at 23:33:14, Robert Hyatt wrote: >> >>>Note that I qualified my answer. "there is no apparent DR for searches that >>>we do today, or searches we might do in 2 years." >> >>Sure, but to me, it sound like you believe this is a case of assuming no-DR >>untill proven otherwise. If anything I would probably say the opposite: assume >>DR untill proven otherwise. > >I can imagine positions when there is an increasing returns. And I can imagine positions where there are diminishing returns.... >Imagine a position when there is a trap when at small depth programs fall into >the trap and lose the game. ...think of a simple recapture :) >If you give program at small depth to play you may find result of 50% because >the program that starts is losing because of falling into the trap and after >falling into the trap finding the moves is simple. > >If you give programs at big depthes to play they do not fall into the trap so >you may see result of more than 50%. When we talk about DR or no-DR we mean _on average_. There will be positions that can't be solved in 8 plies but requires 9 or more, that is not the point. Rating is also an _average_ strength measure, sometimes or in some positions you play bad and sometimes great, depends... >I see no reason to assume that there is diminishing returns. >It is clear that there will be 0 returns after solving the game and I tend to >believe that usually there is a deminishing returns even before solving the game >but when the game is not simple you are not close to solving the game and it is >not clear for me that practically there is deminishing returns. No it is not clear for me either, but a few things indicate there might be some effect. 1) Once you have found the right move going deeper won't help. 2) Finding the correct move will be a "diminishing" function of the ply. 3) There are a lot more draws between higher rated players than amongst lower rated. In fact someone plottet the curve once and it was slowly converging towards 100% draws. There might be some restoring effect, like the games will on average get longer, and that will increase the chance of a blunder from the lower rated player. This however is not so obvious I think, since GM games are AFAIK not longer than my games. Computer games may show a different behavior, I don't know. >I expect to see deminishing returns in chess in the future only because I >believe that chess is relatively a simple game but it does not mean that it is >simple enough to have diminishing returns without big books on the hardware of >today. > >Uri -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.