Author: Vincent Diepeveen
Date: 03:46:29 10/16/02
Go up one level in this thread
On October 15, 2002 at 03:27:34, Jeremiah Penery wrote: reduce the extensions. i use singular extensions in diep. see posting elsewhere here. you see also a 23 ply line from diep there from which just 2 checks. and the search depth is 17 ply. So i won somehow 6 plies because of singular extensions, which basically extends threats against pawns and captures (in this case no checks as there were only 2 which < 6 ply ). You so naive? >On October 14, 2002 at 09:44:06, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: > >>On October 14, 2002 at 07:05:42, Dave Gomboc 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. >>> >>>Bullshit -- I said this years ago, after asking a member of the DB team. >> >>>Hsu just said it himself too: >> >>>EeEk(* DM) kibitzes: next question: Seems like people wants to know >>>what the exact meaning of ""12(6)" in the Deep Blue log files, can you >>>explain this? >>>CrazyBird(DM) kibitzes: 12(6) means 12 plies of brute force (not >>>counting the search extensions & quiescence). >> >>by definition this means: it was 12 ply not counting search extensions >>and qsearch. of course hardware search is part of that. >> >>>CrazyBird(DM) kibitzes: 6 means the maximum hardware search depth >>>allowed. >> >>that's part of that 12 ply. If you interpret it different then that's >>your problem and wrong. >> >>'brute force search' is everything including hardware. In fact hsu >>even specified it for the technical gifted that it is just >>EXCLUDING qsearch and excluding extensions. >> >>>CrazyBird(DM) kibitzes: this means that the PV could be up to 6 plies >>>deeper before quiescence. >> >>*possibly* if it prints (6), the logs clearly show that 5(6) doesn't >>show a 5 ply mainline. but < 5 > >Sometimes it will happen, so? I've seen Fritz display a one-move PV for many >plies in a row, so just because they show a short PV occasionally doesn't mean >much of anything. > >There is not a single 5(6) in the logs, so I take 4(5) instead. >After wrong pondering I find mainlines of length: > >Game 1: 2, 2, 3, 4, 3, 5, 2, 5, 6, 3, 5, 15, 3, 4, 6, 3, 7 >Game 2: 3, 7, 7, 5, 6, 6, 2, 7, 8, 4, 4, 7 >Game 3: 2, 4, 6, 6, 7, 4, 6, 4, 6, 3, 3, 4, 4, 4, 7, 5, 3, 6, 13, 6, 7 >Game 4: 2, 3, 9, 2, 5, 3, 6, 4, 7, 3, 15, 5, 6, 7, 3, 7, 12 >Game 5: 3, 5, 6, 11, 5, 2, 7, 5, 9, 4, 9, 6, 6, 7, 10, 2, 7 >Game 6: 14, 4, 2, 3 > >Total length 2: 10 >Total length 3: 15 >Total length 4: 13 >Total length 5: 10 >Total length > 5: 40 >Average length: 5.45 (480/88) > >This _IS_ proof that n(n+1) does NOT show a mainline of length < n in the >average case. Even if you want to take only the first 5 such outputs in a game, >the average is 4.86. Go further and take only the first 3 - the average is >still 4.66.
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.