Author: Ilya P. Kozachenko
Date: 04:32:07 08/28/98
Go up one level in this thread
On August 28, 1998 at 03:02:02, Alessio Iacovoni wrote: >On August 28, 1998 at 01:18:14, Jeff Anderson wrote: > >> >>> >>> Another point is that 2 engines running simultaneously could receive only 50% >>>of the CPU time each (or so) and so the tactical engine would not reach the same >>>depth as if it was running alone (at least one full ply of even more shorter) >>>and so, the evaluation of BOTH programs would be less reliable? Like when you >>>make one engine play another in Fritz 5, they are both weaker than when running >>>alone. >>> >>> >>>Serge Desmarais >> >>Well as Mr. Iacovoni suggested, this would require two processors. >>Jeff > > >By the way Jeff.. i'm not a programmer but I just read an article on the thread >of alt.computers.chess concerning "hsu" and deep blue... apparently his strategy >seems very similar... all of the moves are passed to a "unit" of some sort >before beeing played. The article is not very clear on what this "unit" actually >does. So my idea is not that original.. but at least tha fact that hsu is >working in the same direction does show that, at least to some extent, my idea >is not to stupid. BTW, how you would decide, which move - produced by tactical or positional engine - it's better to select ? It was the point, when discussing of the same idea I posted, finished.
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.