Author: Mark Young
Date: 14:39:50 10/19/02
Go up one level in this thread
On October 19, 2002 at 17:27:43, Uri Blass wrote: >On October 19, 2002 at 17:03:51, Dave Gomboc wrote: > >>On October 19, 2002 at 14:45:19, Steve Lim wrote: >> >>>SJLIM: Alot of programmers on CCC have asked me to ask you this.. for >>>clarification.. >>>SJLIM: Please explain search depths for the notations 4(5) and clarify earlier >>>comments about 12(6). This may include indicating what is "normal full width" >>>searching, extensions, quiesence search, or other types of searching DB2 >>>utilized, and which was done in software versus in the hardware chess chips. >>>SJLIM: Also, what types of pruning were used. This topic has generated enourmous >>>discussion on CCC. >>>CrazyBird: 4(5)means the same thing. 5-ply maximum hardware depth, although it >>>is obviously impossible in this case. >>>CrazyBird: since the brute force depth is 4. >>>CrazyBird: i can't really go into the details of the hardware pruning. it is >>>related to method of analogy pruning, or rather a basterized form of it. >>>CrazyBird: limitation in the contract with ibm. >>>SJLIM: Can this be answered? - Does 12(6) mean the 6 is included _in_ the 12, or >>>in addition to the 12? >>>CrazyBird: 6 is part of 12, but the hardware can search less than 6, that is the >>>software horizon may be more than 6 plies. >>>CrazyBird: and of course, the selective depth can be arbitrarily deep, well, no >>>more than 8 times brute force. >>>CrazyBird: argh, the q search. it is in hardware. both sides are allowed checks >>>in quiescence search. max is 8, i think. >> >>Clearly, Vincent's interpretation is supported here. >> >>I'm still sure they were searching much deeper than 12 ply in important lines >>though! >> >>Dave > >Of course and it is the case for every program. > >They probably searched more important lines than Fritz so I do not think that >their 12 plies are eqvivalent to fritz's 12 plies but I still strongly believe >that their 12 plies are not more than Fritz's 14 plies and Fritz can search more >than 14 plies in the middle game with fast hardware so I guess that Fritz with >fast hardware is better. > >Uri I also think you are correct that a brute force 12 ply search is not better then a 14 ply Deep fritz search. I think this is supported by the Kramnik match results, and why Kramnik said he found Deep Fritz playing better moves in the same position as Deep Blue. I don't think Kramnik was blowing smoke when he said Deep Fritz is stronger then Deep Blue.
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.