Author: Uri Blass
Date: 15:22:37 08/21/02
Go up one level in this thread
On August 21, 2002 at 17:52:53, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On August 21, 2002 at 17:31:53, Uri Blass wrote: > >>On August 21, 2002 at 17:21:08, Robert Hyatt wrote: >> >>>On August 21, 2002 at 14:48:04, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: >>> >>>>On August 21, 2002 at 14:42:49, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>>> >>>>Bob if you don't read what they write, >>>>then please show us you can do math. >>>> >>>>Please quote what is the theoretic number to search FULLWIDTH without >>>>hashtables OR killermoves and WITH singular extensions a treesize >>>>of 18 ply.. >>>> >>> >>>First, they don't claim to do "fullwidth" in the hardware. >> >>The 12.2 is software+hardware depth. >>It is very clear from their paper. >> >>see page 13 table 2 >> >>iteration 12 >>minimum software depth 8 >> >>The explanation say that is it about the position before white's move >>in game 2 against kasparov. >> >>Uri > > >I don't begin to know how to interpret those numbers in light of the email >I have received from the DB group about the 12(6) issue. IE do you assume >that "minimum software depth" is the software depth they searched to without >extensions? Yes > I don't know enough to guess there, since this doesn't seem to >quite square with the explanation they have sent me (and which I posted here >a few months back)... > >It is not clear who precisely wrote the paper, which would make interpreting >this a bit less clear. Obviously Hsu has been gone for a couple of years, >so a bit of confusion could easily creep in. Some of the data actually seems >to sound like deep blue 1, while the paper seems to imply that it is about >deep blue 2. But the numbers suggest a bit of confusion there as well... It seems that IBM gave misleading information about the number of nodes of deeper blue based on this paper. 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.