Author: Uri Blass
Date: 10:45:07 07/19/02
Go up one level in this thread
On July 19, 2002 at 13:16:06, Joshua Lee wrote: >I was wondering that if the DB team estimated a rating or over 300 points higher >than the programs at that time on equivalent hardware or equal search, they >weren't clear on that. That would mean 2796 on a P200 and Fritz 7 for example >wouldn't be anywhere near this on a P200. Has anyone seen anything about their >tests against commercial software and does anyone have any opinions about this? > >Granted that Software has improved and that on Todays Fastest Hardware The Top >Programs (provided the SSDF list is that accurate) is on equal footing with Deep >Thought and DB Jr. Why do you think that they may be only equal. I believe that the opinion of most programmers is that the top programs of today are clearly better than Deep thought and deep blue JR. It is known that their search algorithms were bad relative to what is known today (otherwise you could see people who copy their search algorithms with good results when I know that the people who tried to copy the way that they use singular extensions got bad results in games so they do not use it). It is known that they believed some wrong assumptions They believed that null move pruning is dangerous at their speed when the results say that null move pruning is only more productive when the machines are faster. They believed that the brute force depth is not very important at their speed and singular extensions are more important and they were again wrong(programs already have similiar speed to deep thought and they do not use singular extensions in the way that deep thought used them). Their speed simply misleaded them to wrong assumptions that they did not test. 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.