Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Addressing frequently-discussed Deep Blue issues (from a FHH talk)

Author: Uri Blass

Date: 07:38:23 10/08/02

Go up one level in this thread


On October 08, 2002 at 10:30:16, Robert Hyatt wrote:

>On October 08, 2002 at 03:58:13, Tom Kerrigan wrote:
>
>>On October 07, 2002 at 21:35:23, Robert Hyatt wrote:
>>
>>>Never said there was _not_ one.  I said "there was no reasonably efficient
>>>software implementation" that could be used in an engine."  Big difference.
>>>You _can_ emulate _anything_ in software, by definition.  But that doesn't
>>>mean you can use it to play games...
>>
>>Is that what you said? What was the date? I'd like to look that thread up.
>>
>>Also, it doesn't mean you can use it to play games? Then what software
>>simulation was Joel playing?
>>
>
>Deep Blue 2 on deep blue 1 hardware, for one thing.  The software eval was
>around
>for a long time, but it was not used to play gaime so far as I was ever told.
>It was used
>purely for tuning the eval by playing over a bunch of games, and
>"least-square-ing"
>the total error.
>
>I wouldn't begin to guess when I wrote that.  However, since I have had the deep
>thought
>software evaluation tuning code on my ftp site for years, it was a long time ago
>to be
>sure...
>
>However, I don't think anyone would attempt to lash that up to a search and play
>chess,
>for the reasons I gave you a year or two ago.  The software emulation would be
>way too
>slow.

Not everybody is interested in generating
a stronger program.

I believe that there are people who are
interested in emulating deep blue in software
not for being number 1.

Uri
>
>
>
>
>
>>-Tom



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.