Author: Gian-Carlo Pascutto
Date: 02:43:15 08/22/02
Go up one level in this thread
On August 21, 2002 at 23:00:53, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On August 21, 2002 at 19:19:02, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: > >>On August 21, 2002 at 17:27:03, Robert Hyatt wrote: >> >>>On August 21, 2002 at 14:50:15, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: >>> >>>>On August 21, 2002 at 14:48:26, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>>> >>>>Under 4.0 now already. Man you get older every day. >>>>You didn't read very well what i wrote about more cpu's joining in. >> >>As you did write this before reading the other replies above i will >>ignore this. >> > >I think that is the best way to handle these arguments. Ignore the stuff >you don't want to deal with. Speculate and make wild claims with no supporting >data for the points you do want to deal with. It's funny that it should be you saying this. Vincent is annoyed at you because it's you that's doing the handwaving in this part of the argument, not the other way around. I am saying that your 4.0 number cannot be used as their branching factor because it is based on search times and ignores the variable of more processors kickin in. Handwaving doesn't make this problem go away. I still haven't seen this sufficiently addressed, so I will get some more data about it myself. -- GCP
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.