Author: Georg v. Zimmermann
Date: 02:18:06 08/05/02
Go up one level in this thread
Nice article, thx for sharing ! On August 04, 2002 at 17:26:21, Terry McCracken wrote: >In an Ancient Game, Computing's Future >By KATIE HAFNER > > >Part of the challenge has to do with processing speed. The typical chess program >can evaluate about 300,000 positions per second, and Deep Blue was able to >evaluate some 200 million positions per second. By midgame, most Go programs can >evaluate only a couple of dozen positions each second, said Anders Kierulf, who >wrote a program called SmartGo. Well that is not because Go is difficult, but because most Go programmers seem to try to use the Botvinnik "method". IMHO this will never work. > >In the course of a chess game, a player has an average of 25 to 35 moves >available. In Go, on the other hand, a player can choose from an average of 240 >moves. A Go-playing computer would take about 30,000 years to look as far ahead >as Deep Blue can with chess in three seconds, said Michael Reiss, a computer >scientist in London. That might be correct if you assume mini-max and no search improvements, and a ply depth of > 11 for deep blue in < 3 secs. But with using alpha-beta it is already _far_ off. > >All are very strong Go players, and it takes a strong Go player to write even a >weak Go program. Mr. Fotland, for instance, said he had written programs for >checkers, Othello and chess. The algorithms are all very similar, and it is not >difficult to write a reasonably strong program, he said. Each of the games took >him a year or two to finish. "But when I started on Go," he said, "there was no >end to it." How strong is Mr. Fotlands chess program ? But overall the article is quite accurate and well researched for a newspaper. Regards, Georg v. Zimmermann
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.