Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 17:18:38 08/22/02
Go up one level in this thread
On August 22, 2002 at 18:29:38, Uri Blass wrote: >On August 22, 2002 at 17:20:00, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On August 22, 2002 at 14:15:54, Gian-Carlo Pascutto wrote: >> >>>On August 22, 2002 at 13:47:46, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>> >>>>Doesn't it depend on the definition of "ply"? >>> >>>If they use a nonstandard definition of 'ply', then it's meaningless >>>to say that they did 18 ply and therefor must have been great. >>> >>>None of the papers imply they do anything like that. >>> >>>There is a very simple explanation that makes everything come >>>out logical: they didn't do 18 ply but 12. But then again, that's >>>not an acceptable idea to some people. >>> >>>-- >>>GCP >> >>It simply isn't _reasonable_. Based on having watched them search 10-11 >>plies on deep thought. To assume that they get nothing from going 100X >>faster? Do you _really_ believe that? Then why not stick with the original >>deep thought hardware??? > >Explanations: >1)The assumption of 100xfaster was wrong. That isn't an assumption. We know the average speed of deep thought was 2M nodes per second, directly from Hsu. We also know that the average speed of DB was 200M from the same source... >2)They used more extensions. that could certainly possible... > >I remember that you claimed that 2 is not correct but >I did not see it in the paper. I didn't say it wasn't correct. I said that deep blue's search was definitely derived from deep thought's search. DB could have had a few more extensions added later. But the base search was done before the first match and didn't change a lot according to what they wrote. > >I only remember from your reply to GCP that Deep blue prototype >was the basis for deep blue but I do not understand the basis >as the same. In Hsu's own words, at the 1994 ACM event... "Deep Blue prototype is using a newer search approach (newer way of handling extensions). But it is using the same chess processors as deep thought 2 used." He didn't elaborate much on the search ideas at the time, although recent publications have revealed that it had become pretty complex as to what they extended on and how they did it... > >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.