Author: Tom Kerrigan
Date: 04:53:51 08/14/98
Go up one level in this thread
Sounds logical, but I recall a graph in "Chess Skill in Man and Machine" (one of the few interesting/useful things in the book...) that showed 1 ply = 200 rating points, up through Deep Thought. Of course, using this rule of thumb to compare two programs in the same "era" is fairly pointless, but I think that over long periods of time, the rule of thumb may still hold true. -Tom On August 13, 1998 at 18:24:21, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On August 13, 1998 at 17:59:03, Jeff Anderson wrote: > >>I do not think that today a graph like that would be relevant. Some programs >>sacrafice plies for a much more thorough evaluation. Other programs sacrafice a >> thorough evaluation for speed. If you had a chart like this, a program that >>searched slow would but evaluated well would do very well on a chart like that, >>while a fast program that didn't have as complex evaluation would do poor. But >>if you actually had a match between these two programs they two extremes would >>probably even out. >> > > >two often-used measures, NPS and depth, are really only good for comparing >A to A, ie the same program at a faster NPS or deeper depth. I believe that >programs play better as they go faster, if the speed is gotten by either >faster hardware or more efficient programming, rather than stripping something >out or taking a "shortcut." > >I'd suspect that *everybody* agrees, because if you notice at every event where >a computer plays another computer or a strong human, the computer operator makes >every possible effort to get the fastest machine possible. > >But you can't compare NPS between two different programs and conclude anything >about their "strength" based only on NPS. Ditto for "depth" because everyone >has a different "meaning" for depth=10 plies, for example... > > > > > >> >> >>On August 13, 1998 at 06:12:37, Leon Stancliff wrote: >> >>> Can anyone tell me? >>> >>> A few years ago I saw a graph of ply level in the middle game versus >>>anticipated rating. Has anyone attempted to do this same thing recently? We have >>>estimates of the approximate rating increase per ply, and approximate rating >>>increase with doubling of speed. >>> >>> Obviously selectivity, opening book and hashtables make a difference. But I >>>feel certain someone has investigated the question I have proposed. What ply >>>level was DeepBlue reaching in the Kasparov match? What ply level was Rebel 10 >>>reaching in the longer games of the Anand match? >>> >>>Leon Stancliff
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.