Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 09:02:04 10/17/02
Go up one level in this thread
On October 17, 2002 at 11:08:19, Uri Blass wrote: >On October 17, 2002 at 10:46:42, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On October 17, 2002 at 08:01:56, Uri Blass wrote: >> >>>On October 17, 2002 at 07:21:24, Jeremiah Penery wrote: >>> >>>>On October 17, 2002 at 07:04:42, Uri Blass wrote: >>>> >>>>>On October 17, 2002 at 06:46:50, Jeremiah Penery wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>On October 17, 2002 at 06:13:26, Johan Melin wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>If somebody tells you that "the storage capacity of this harddrive is 20 GB, 5 >>>>>>>GB is just the linux partition", then what is the storage capacity? 25 GB? >>>>>> >>>>>>To use your hard drive example: If 20(5) is the question, and I answer, "20GB >>>>>>total in terms of Windows. 5 is just the Linux partition," what would you make >>>>>>of that statement? IMO, it's possible to interpret that in more than one way. >>>>>>The problem is that it's unclear what "in terms of Windows" means, just as it's >>>>>>unclear what "in terms of brute force" means in Hsu's statement. >>>>> >>>>>The difference is that windows and linux seem to contradict when there is no >>>>>contradiction between brute force and hardware. >>>> >>>>It does not say, "The Windows partition is 20GB," or "Windows says the disk is >>>>20GB, but 5GB is given to Linux." Just like Hsu doesn't say, "12 ply is the >>>>software partition," or "12 ply is the total (hardware+software) depth, but 6 >>>>ply is given to the hardware." >>>> >>>>There is not a clear definition of what the phrase "in terms of Windows" means, >>>>just as we don't have a clear definition of what Hsu means when he says "in >>>>terms of brute force". >>> >>>We have a clear hint >>> >>>Copied from previous post: >>> >>>-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>CrazyBird(DM) kibitzes: 12(6) means 12 plies of brute force (not >>>counting the search extensions & quiescence). >>>CrazyBird(DM) kibitzes: 6 means the maximum hardware search depth >>>allowed. >>>CrazyBird(DM) kibitzes: this means that the PV could be up to 6 plies >>>deeper before quiescence. >>>------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> >>>Brute force means not counting search extensions and qsearch. >> >>How to conclude that? Of course it doesn't count q-search because that is >>_heavily_ >>based on forward pruning. But not counting extensions? We don't refer to >>anybody's >>12 ply search as "12 plies of brute force + extensions"... >> >>That kind of misuse of the term brute-force would not make it past any journal >>reviewer, because the term "brute-force" is very specific in the world of AI. >> >> >> >>> >>>In terms of brute force means without counting qsearch and extensions. >> >>Not _anywhere_ that I know of. No book. No Journal. No Nothing... >> >> >>>The discussion was about the output so he also explained the importance of the 6 >>>by the words that the pv could be up to 6 plies deeper before quiescence. >>> >>>It seems clear to me that he meant to compare the length of the real pv and the >>>length of the pv in the logfiles. >> >>Maybe, except for one thing. "up to 6 plies deeper". If the hardware searches >>6 plies, >>then that statement is _wrong_. He would have said "at _least_ 6 plies deeper, >>since >>the hardware also does the normal extensions (singular extensions, recaptures, >>check, >>etc.). So "up to 6" doesn't mean what you think... Had he said "at least 6" >>your interpretation >>might be reasonable... > >I do not know if the hardware also does the normal extensions but I did not read >his book. The hardware has _always_ done the normal extensions. Except for deep thought which did not do singular extensions in hardware, although it did checks, recaps, etc, because it was based on Belle which also did those... > >Even in case that the hardware does normal extensions, >"at least" is wrong because the hardware did not search a constant number of >plies ,and there were cases that it searched less plies than the maximal plies. > >Uri And _clearly_ "up to" is also wrong for the same reason, which was my _point_.
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.