Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 09:47:36 07/28/02
Go up one level in this thread
On July 28, 2002 at 02:48:28, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: >On July 27, 2002 at 23:10:10, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >Oh that position, yeah there the Deep Blue search system >which are focussed upon mate threats, they should >work well there. > >Crafty is a bad compare here. How long does it take your program to get +2.5??? Best so far is Hiarcs at several minutes... > >>On July 27, 2002 at 19:57:39, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: >> >>>On July 27, 2002 at 09:02:13, Alvaro Jose Povoa Cardoso wrote: >>> >>>what the hell do you talk about? >> >> >>He is talking about the Nf6+ move crafty played against chessmaster in >>the KKUP tournament a few years ago. Crafty saw a draw score after a 13-14 >>ply search. Hsu sent me some brief output from Deep Blue Junior that showed >>that in under 2 minutes, it saw our score as +2.5... Several moves into the >>game Crafty failed high and finally agreed. DB Jr saw it very quickly while >>everyone else is taking quite a long time compared to their two minutes. Note >>that this was DB Jr model 1, not the 1997 version... > >r1b1r1k1/1q3ppp/ppn5/2bNp3/P4B2/5Q1P/BP3PP1/R2R2K1 w - - 2 19 > >DB jr is just as good as the 97 version, considering their parallel >speedup extrapolation. > >>>I can show you a bunch of bad moves DBII made against kasparov >>>which no other computer makes, but i don't see a single good >>>move DB makes which todays software doesn't find. > >>This was simply an attempt to compare their tactics to ours. At least in > >To that of crafty of course ,which isn't doing many checks in qsearch >nor extending mate threats a lot. nor extending singular stuff. > >in this case the system as they describe how they extend works great >of course. I bet Brutus will find this easily too. > >BTW did Hsu give an output? > >because all the things i hear is always like: "he told me". >I want to see outputs :) > >it could be true he just made a few moves and then got the score. >i remember an analysis of it a few years ago. if you give a big patzer >score for king safety you sure can get +2.xx there, otherwise it's a >pretty deep combi to see you win a piece on g6 using a pin of a pawn h4 h5. > >>this position, theirs is better. >> >> >> >>> >>>>Sorry to return to this old post by Dr. Robert Hyatt, but I red it a little >>>>late. >>>>I know this is just one position, but I was wondering what conclusions could we >>>>take from this test? >>>>It seamed to me that current programs were a little slow in finding the winning >>>>score (not the move). >>>> >>>>Any comments? >>>> >>>>Best regards, >>>>Alvaro
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.