Author: Rolf Tueschen
Date: 10:35:12 09/13/02
Go up one level in this thread
On September 13, 2002 at 13:22:15, Uri Blass wrote: >On September 13, 2002 at 13:03:57, Dave Gomboc wrote: > >>On September 13, 2002 at 12:54:28, Uri Blass wrote: >> >>>On September 13, 2002 at 12:43:36, Dave Gomboc wrote: >>> >>>>On September 13, 2002 at 11:54:04, Uri Blass wrote: >>>> >>>>>On September 13, 2002 at 11:31:10, Rolf Tueschen wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>On September 13, 2002 at 11:17:20, Uri Blass wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>On September 13, 2002 at 11:16:07, Uri Blass wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>On September 13, 2002 at 11:06:57, Rolf Tueschen wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>On September 13, 2002 at 10:56:10, Uri Blass wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>On September 13, 2002 at 10:38:17, Rolf Tueschen wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>I disagree. >>>>>>>>>>>>Most of the population of chess programs is clearly weaker than the top >>>>>>>>>>>>programs. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>Gnuchess is losing against crafty even if you give gnuchess hardware that is 10 >>>>>>>>>>>>times faster if the time control is slow enough and gnuchess is not a weak >>>>>>>>>>>>program but at the level of the average amateur. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>Uri >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>I agree. This was chapter one though. Seems fair enough that GNU which has no >>>>>>>>>>>clue about endgames, tablebases, not even GM books, and then being amateur, is >>>>>>>>>>>weaker than Crafty. Was GNU ever tuned on Crafty? I mean if I would take GNU as >>>>>>>>>>>a pro I would make at least 8th place in SSDF out of it. But actually we are >>>>>>>>>>>comparing apples and beans. GNU is not of "this" world now. BTW I played >>>>>>>>>>>SIBIRIAN, for that nice prog I promissed you the same! Implement all the modern >>>>>>>>>>>stuff and it will play billy bully with FRITZ, I suppose. Not even needing >>>>>>>>>>>tablebases. Cough. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>Rolf Tueschen >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>I have to disagree again. >>>>>>>>>>I do not know how the book of gnuchess was build but it is not so bad and it has >>>>>>>>>>a lot of variety. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>I do not think that gnu lose games because of book. >>>>>>>>>>Tablebases are also not very important. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>Gnu is going to lose also against list inspite of the fact that list has no book >>>>>>>>>>and not because of tablebases advantage. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>Gnu need better search rules and better evaluation in order to be in the same >>>>>>>>>>level of the top programs. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>Uri >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>Again I must agree. Since all modern progs are founded on these free (?) sources >>>>>>>>>by defintion they are stronger. How could they be weaker? That is the same with >>>>>>>>>the pro's which were all founded in parts on CRAFTY. How could CRAFTY still be >>>>>>>>>stronger? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>The pro are not based on crafty and crafty clearly has knowledge that most pro >>>>>>>>do not have. >>>>>> >>>>>>To specify this I have to change it into "all new and working ideas" in Crafty >>>>>>have been noted by the pros and they will surely have found a way to implement >>>>>>the idea into their own prog. I didn't mean that thy simply copied the code, >>>>>>which could be understood because I wrote "free sources". What I meant was ideas >>>>>>that could be examined because they were published in public. Please correct me >>>>>>if that is impossible for reasons unknown to me. Also I din't mean that the pros >>>>>>were just waiting for news spreading out of Bob's working kitchen. Of course >>>>>>they make their own inventions too. At least I think so. >>>>>> >>>>>>Rolf Tueschen >>>>> >>>>>I know that at least part of the pro did not do it. >>>>>I know that Ed only in the last Rebel reinvented the internal iterative >>>>>deepening. >>>>> >>>>>He was surprised to find that this idea is used in crafty. >>>>> >>>>>He looked at the comments in the crafty code some years ago but he missed >>>>>the comment about internal iterative deepening. >>>>> >>>>>He did not look at the crafty source code later based on my knowledge. >>>>> >>>>>I know that other programmers also did not learn the ideas in the crafty >>>>>code. >>>>>I think that the main problem is to understand it. >>>>> >>>>>It is not easy to understand the crafty code and programmers prefer to use their >>>>>time to try their ideas instead of trying to understand the crafty code. >>>>> >>>>>Uri >>>> >>>> >>>>Ed's IID is different than traditional IID, though. >>>> >>>>Dave >>> >>>Yes but the point is that Ed did not know about the IID idea when he invented >>>it. >>> >>>Uri >> >>You're sure about that? I think he probably just tried it 10+ years ago then >>forgot about it :-) >> >>Dave > >Forgetting and not knowing is the same for me. > >Uri Can you swim, Uri? :) Rolf Tueschen
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.