Author: Mike Hood
Date: 14:47:24 03/27/02
Go up one level in this thread
On March 27, 2002 at 15:44:42, William H Rogers wrote: >On March 27, 2002 at 15:35:47, Slater Wold wrote: > >>On March 27, 2002 at 15:09:05, ALI MIRAFZALI wrote: >> >>My responses, based on the hundreds of hours I've spent reading about this >>project. >> >>>As i have read in theses messages;You believe that Current programs >>>are stronger than the 1997 Deeper Blue.Since that was a dedicated machine not a >>>program that can be run on different Computers I have the following questions. >>> 1.What Elo would the 1997 version of Deep Blue get on the SSDF >>>(this is a hypothetical question;that is if SSDF tested Deep Blue.) >> >>2890. >> >>> 2.Same question for the 1996 version. >> >>2675 >> >>> 3.How important is pruning? Why or why not do the current programs >>>have better pruning than Deep Blue? >> >>Deep Blue didn't prune. Brute force, no null move. Hsu looked into null move, >>however he felt against Kasparov, that it might be a risk. Therefore he didn't >>use it. On a 1.0Ghz machine, that extra ply from pruning is a make or break >>thing. At 200M nps, you've got some nodes to spare. >> >>> 4.If current programs (shredder 2715 Elo on 1200 Mhz For example) >>>are indeed sronger than Deep Blue 1997;What specifically makes them stronger? >> >>They aren't. They won't be for a long time. > >That is a moote question or answer as we do not know just how strong Deep Blue >really was. If during the game with Kasparov, he was not at his best, and if >they had played more games, say 5 or 10, then we might have a much closer >guestimate as to the playing strength, but for now we do not. It is also known >that we have programs now with much better chess knowledge than they had when >Deep Blue was written. Remember that DB relied mostly on its tremendous speed >not on a great amount of chess knowledge. It is quite possible that Shredder or >some of the other programs written today would fair much better than the last >version of DB, but we will never know as IBM, once the got the title, did not >want to risk losing it. If IBM ever has the guts to resurrect Deep Blue, let's hope they play it against a selection of the best current chess programs for PCs and (money allowing) several top GMs, not just Kasparov. IMO Anand is a better anti-computer player than Kasparov. I hope that Vincent Diepeveen could also play against Deep Blue. That will finally give us a half-way decent rating for Deep Blue, instead of the bloated Elo figure sometimes thrown about.
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.