Author: Vincent Diepeveen
Date: 16:14:17 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 We talk about an email around the year 2000 (in 1999 you still said 12 ply) from a dude called Campbell , not the programmer of the thing Hsu. He probably referred to 'average' search depth. They have a big table later in the paper *average* search depth. Suggesting that deep blue 2 which was only slightly faster than deep blue 1 (no more than a factor 2) getting suddenly 6 plies extra is not possible. >that "minimum software depth" is the software depth they searched to without >extensions? 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...
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.