Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: (more info)

Author: Vincent Diepeveen

Date: 11:29:19 07/28/02

Go up one level in this thread


On July 28, 2002 at 12:51:33, Robert Hyatt wrote:

>On July 28, 2002 at 12:47:36, Robert Hyatt wrote:
>
>>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?
>
>
>Yes he sent me output.  As I mentioned, the problem is trying to find it
>in my email backups.  That was back around 1996 or so, buried an hundreds
>of thousands of emails...  Not easy to find.

that would be in itself weird because the game with Nf6 was played
januari 99 or so.

Note that diep sees very quickly a draw in deepblueII-kasparov
for the move Qe3. In fact it doesn't play the blunder Kf1?? from
deep blue but plays kh2! instead within tournament time of 40 in 2!!

Best regards,
Vincent

>
>>>
>>>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.
>
>He got the +2.5 while searching the given position.  His PV started with
>Nf6+ and the score was +2.5 before 120 seconds had gone by.  I don't remember
>when it failed high, I just remember the +2.5 took under two minutes.  Crafty
>searched to 14 plies on that move in 1996 and had 0.00.  It had 0.00 for
>another couple of moves before it started failing hi as Hsu promised...
>
>
>
>>>
>>>>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.