Author: Vincent Diepeveen
Date: 03:08:44 10/14/02
Go up one level in this thread
On October 14, 2002 at 05:13:03, Andreas Guettinger wrote: >On October 13, 2002 at 15:35:12, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: > >>On October 13, 2002 at 14:40:12, James Swafford wrote: >> >>I wonder why. there is just one person ever in this whole >>planet who said 12(6) = 18 ply, and that's robert hyatt. >> >>there is 4 the same statements from hsu. >> a) page 5 at his paper. >> b) 3 in this talk >> >>there is many statements from hyatt in 98 and 99 that it was >>getting 12 ply, when in 99 at world champs many got 12 ply it was >>18 ply suddenly... >> >>But the clearest statement is next: >> >>EeEk(* DM) kibitzes: kib question from ardee: Does "12(6)" mean 12 total ply or >>12+6=18 total ply? This has the been source of huge arguments for years! >> >>directly the answer came a few seconds later: >> >>CrazyBird(DM) kibitzes: 12 total in terms of brute force. 6 is just the max >>partition in hardware. >> >> > >Utter nonsense. What would be sense of a million dollar hardware that is >restricted for ply 1 to 6? Even my Super Forte on a 5Mhz 65xx got 6 ply Brute >Force in 1987. 480 processors that fight for 48000 positions? > >12 ply software, then harware kicks in. 12 ply + 6 ply means a search depth <= >18 ply. > >Andreas Please listen carefully. He said it is 12 ply. It was 12 ply. NO ONE got 12 ply in 1997 with such a program. Schach 3.0 if you give it billions of nodes for a search doesn't get further than 12 ply *ever*. And this is a very simple program in assembly, WITH nullmove. Do you get the point? That we today have such improved engines which take better advantage of RAM and have a better branching factor, you cannot compare that with 1997 deep blue. Because deep blue didn't use nullmove for example. With nullmove Fritz has a branching factor defined by: 2.8^depth * c Deep Blue has more like 4.5^depth * e where the 'e' from deep blue is MUCH bigger than c from fritz. So please do not compare it. everyone with a calculator knows that 2.8 to the power depth is going to be way way less than 4.5 to the power depth. Do you?
This page took 0.01 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.