Author: Mark Young
Date: 18:31:39 10/19/02
Go up one level in this thread
On October 19, 2002 at 20:03:20, martin fierz wrote: >On October 19, 2002 at 15:47:17, Mark Young wrote: > >perhaps because of the DF-DJ qualifier for the brains-in-bahrain match which >ended 12-12?! at least that should make it clear that there is no significant >difference in playing strength between the two... Can't be that, that was over a year ago and many version I bet ago. > >aloha > martin > >>On October 19, 2002 at 14:45:19, Steve Lim wrote: >> >>>SJLIM: Hello all. >>>CrazyBird: hi. >>>CrazyBird: sorry for the time screwup, missed the email from sjlim. >>>SJLIM: just a few moments to get more listeners =) >>>CrazyBird: mostly programmers here? >>>SJLIM: folks.. we'll be giving priority to the tech questions first.. if we >>>exhaust them.. then we'll carry on with general questions - time permitting. >>>CrazyBird: this is intended to be more technical, but i guess anything goes. >>>SJLIM: May I formally welcome Deep Blue creator Feng-Hsiung Hsu aka CrazyBird.. >>>SJLIM: I guess we can begin? >>>CrazyBird: sure. >>>SJLIM: here is a long one.. >>>SJLIM: Hello, Dr. Hsu. My question has to do with the (sadly unlikely) >>>possibility of your undertaking a future chess project using DB-like chess >>>chips. >>>SJLIM: We know that you have acquired the rights to the DB chip design from IBM. >>>It has been reported that in one recent talk you gave you stated that IBM had >>>retained all rights to DB's evaluation function. So, really, two questions: >>>SJLIM: (1) Just the evaluation function? Or most or all of the final DB >>>software? >>>SJLIM: (2) How can a new team effectively recreate DB's eval function (or more) >>>without you, consciously or not, impinging on IBM's intellectual property? >>>CrazyBird: i only have the right to the chip design. also, i cannot reveal what >>>is not already publicly available. >>>CrazyBird: i don't have the code to the software. I wrote the initial code >>>though, so i can replicate the search code at least. >>>CrazyBird: theoretically, you could try to license the IP from IBM, but it would >>>be hard to make sense out of the schematics and so on. >>>SJLIM: thank you.. next question. >>>SJLIM: What proof can you offer that Deep Blue 1997 was stronger than Deep Fritz >>>2002? There is little in the six games on record, and the result against >>>Kasparov was not more impressive (chess-wise) than Fritz's against a very >>>well-prepared Kramnik. >>>CrazyBird: this is all based on old data. deep blue chip was at least 200 points >>>better than the top commercial programs at comparable speed, and deep blue was >>>100 times faster than deep fritz. >>>CrazyBird: it was both tactically stronger and positionally better. >>>CrazyBird: the tactics apparently did not matter in kramnik match. kramnik was >>>not playing very deep tactics. >>>CrazyBird: the positional part matters in two games, but then they were >>>compensated by misplays on kramnik's part. >>>CrazyBird: maybe deep blue overshoots in tactics, or maybe kasparov just played >>>better. >>>CrazyBird: we will know for sure when kasparov plays deep junior. deep fritz is >>>obviously not stronger than deep junior. >>>SJLIM: interesting.. >>>SJLIM: next question. >>>SJLIM: What do you think of Brutus, ChessBase's FPGA hardware chess system >>>currently under development? ( >>>http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=221 ) >>>CrazyBird: very interesting. i am doing something similar with shogi. i may come >>>back to chess when that is done, just for the hack of it. >>>CrazyBird: of course, they have the disadvantage of not knowing what was >>>necessary to play positional chess at very high level. >>>CrazyBird: but they certainly bear watching. >>>SJLIM: Welcome OldPhoenix.. message me your questions. >>>SJLIM: What are the chances of Hsu writing a book about DB targeting the more >>>technically oriented, such as programmers and perhaps the hardware guys? >>>Wouldn't such a book represent an invaluable contribution to the field? >>>CrazyBird: well, there are two articles out there on deep blue. one in IEEE >>>computer, and one in AI. we pretty said whatever needed to be said. >>>SJLIM: thank you. >>>SJLIM: real techie one now. >>>SJLIM: Question for CrazyBird: In the AI article, you estimate that DB searched >>>an average of 126M nodes/sec. Is that taking into account parallel overhead, or >>>would the equivalent number of serial nodes be much less? >>>CrazyBird: actually that is Joe's estimate. maybe it is some recent measurement. >>>during the match, it was about 200 million. >>>CrazyBird: the 200 million was raw count. i don't know what joe meant by the new >>>number. >>>SJLIM: thank you. >>>SJLIM: Unfortunately, we have no super machine for computer chess anymore, where >>>a few years ago there were several: Deep Blue, Cray Blitz, etc. How big are the >>>chances that you sit together with Bob Hyatt at the University of Alabama, you >>>do the harware part, Bob the software part and we get an new chess monster? >>>SJLIM: Since a sponsor would be needed the outcome might be Deep Coca Cola? >>>CrazyBird: well, building a deep blue class machine is not that big a deal these >>>days. >>>CrazyBird: in a talk i gave two days ago, i estimated that the bill of material >>>for a deep blue class machine is less than Kasparov's one-day appearance fee... >>>SJLIM: heh =) >>>CrazyBird: actually probably less than deep fritz's hardware cost. >>>SJLIM: amazing. >>>SJLIM: Here are a couple of yes/no type questions. >>>SJLIM: 1.Does the 12 plies brute force depth of deeper blue means no pruning or >>>can it include pruning in the hardware? >>>CrazyBird: it does include some hardware pruning at the last 3 plies. the >>>pruning appears to have no effect on the search result. that is, it is >>>effectively pure speedup. >>>SJLIM: another,, >>>SJLIM: 2.Does 12 means that the depth of the software in deeper blue was less >>>than 12 plies(12-x when x is the depth of the hardware that is not constant)? >>>CrazyBird: yes, the software "brute force" depth is always less. >>>SJLIM: Question for CrazyBird: In your previous chat session you said that it >>>was possible to "solve" chess.. it was also said that there might be 10^40 >>>positions in chess. This number is so huge, wouldn't it be theoretical >>>impossible just to find a storage media for that kind of data? >>>CrazyBird: well, i meant it might be possible, not i think it is possible. >>>CrazyBird: yes, 10^40 is a very large number, but to have the solution tree, you >>>don't necessarily need the full set. >>>CrazyBird: still, i don't really believe it will be solved. >>>SJLIM: thank you.. here is a follow up question. >>>SJLIM: Question for CrazyBird: Before, the topic came up about computers >>>"solving" chess. To some extent, they are able to do this with tablebases. How >>>many tablebase-men do you think can be solved within the next few years, and >>>further down the line? All positions with "x" men or less? >>>CrazyBird: the number goes up exponentially for each additional man. hardware >>>speed and storage density doubles every 1.5-2 years, but we might be reaching >>>some limit soon. I think we can one additional man within the next 5 years. >>>CrazyBird: also some the 6-men are not really 6-men, but constrained 6-men. >>>SJLIM: so that would be 7 man endgame tables then. >>>CrazyBird: in the sense, pawns are locked and so on. >>>SJLIM: I see. >>>SJLIM: next question.. >>>SJLIM: Yace-Author : Can you please clarify, what you mean by "comparable speed" >>>in "deep blue chip was at least 200 points better than the top commercial >>>programs at comparable speed" >>>CrazyBird: or locked pawn situation, we can go up a little bit faster, since >>>they have a smaller multiplier. >>>SJLIM: opps. >>>CrazyBird: no problem. that was the last part of my answer. >>>SJLIM: ok.. =) >>>CrazyBird: back to the next question. >>>CrazyBird: we had a "phantom queen" problem for the 1997 version of deep blue >>>chip. >>>CrazyBird: which forced us to effectively slow it down by about a factor of 10, >>>and became roughly the same speed as the commercial programs of the day. >>>SJLIM: I see.. so when they played at this 'speed' you still find a 200 point >>>advantage to DB crippled? >>>CrazyBird: murray played 10 games with it against the top programs then and beat >>>them 10-0, which gives a reasonable certainty that it was stronger by at least >>>200 points. >>>SJLIM: I see. >>>CrazyBird: the games were very intriguing, because we were seeing repeatedly >>>some hardware evaluation features at play. >>>SJLIM: interesting.. which ones? =) >>>CrazyBird: murray is giving all the games he has to icga, but i don't know >>>whether the 10 games are included or not. >>>CrazyBird: i can give some examples. >>>CrazyBird: in one game, the opposing program just have no idea that despite its >>>material advantage, its king was getting killed. >>>CrazyBird: in another, the other program did not realize that bishop of opposite >>>color ending was lost for it. >>>CrazyBird: or they had no idea that the open file that their rook occupied was >>>just useless. >>>CrazyBird: something like that. >>>SJLIM: thank you. >>>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. >>>SJLIM: please "message SJLIM" you questions folks. >>>CrazyBird: i am curious, anyone received the book yet? the local bookstore does >>>not have it yet. >>>SJLIM: some people have quoted from your book on CCC I believe. >>>CrazyBird: argh, the q search. it is in hardware. both sides are allowed checks >>>in quiescence search. max is 8, i think. >>>SJLIM: thank you. >>>SJLIM: I think we have only one more tech question for now.. >>>SJLIM: I have a question - it's about Game 6 in the 1996 match. Did DB think >>>that 20 Bxh7+ was a draw? And if so, what does CB think about Berliner's >>>analysis showing that this move would win? >>>CrazyBird: game 6? Kasparov was winning all the time. are u sure that was the >>>game? >>>SJLIM: hmmm.. anyone know? =) I guess its the game with Bxh7 .. game 6? >>>SJLIM: guest211(U) tells you: Kasparov played 20. a3 there, but there was a lot >>>of talk about Bxh7 being a tactical win. >>>CrazyBird: that may be the case, but what is the point? he was winning already. >>>CrazyBird: i think berliner was referring to a different game?\ >>>SJLIM: hmmm.. I guess we'll leave that for future analysis perhaps. =) >>>CrazyBird: there was another game that he could sac on h7, but elected not to, >>>and was glad he did not when he saw deep blue's reply in our lab. >>>SJLIM: one last comment/question from the programmers.. >>>SJLIM: Here's a question. CB, I appreciate your willingness to engage in this >>>Q&A, but its value is limited due to brevity and lack of followup. >>>SJLIM: Would you consider joining a moderated computer chess message board, such >>>as the Computer Chess Club, in order to develop a more robust and full >>>discussion of the many questions surrounding the programming and performance of >>>Deep Blue? I am certain we programmers would welcome your participation. >>>SJLIM: And, it's always possible that your participation in a public forum might >>>encourage potential sponsors to work with you. >>>SJLIM: by the way Hsu, here is a message from Jack who is joining us in the >>>discussion now.. >>>SJLIM: Jack (13:55 19-Oct-02 EDT): I received book from Amazon yesterday >>>SJLIM: =) >>>CrazyBird: well, i am retired as far as computer chess is concerned. besides, it >>>is not clear that there is a great demand for something like deep blue to come >>>back. >>>CrazyBird: and being a married man means priority changes:) >>>SJLIM: no doubt =) >>>SJLIM: ok.. we are running low on time.. I'll try to sneak in as many questions >>>as possible =) >>>SJLIM: ophir : it was described by Mr. M. Campbel that DB lost game 1 in 1997 >>>becuase of a "random move" - what does that really mean? >>>CrazyBird: argh. it was lost to begin with. a bug terminates the game early and >>>caused the kasparov camp to spent all night analyzing why. >>>CrazyBird: they reached the conclusion that it saw a very deep mate:). >>>SJLIM: thats hilarious =) >>>SJLIM: what kind of bug? >>>CrazyBird: it was something related to move selection, some data structure >>>problem, i think. >>>SJLIM: I see.. moving along.. quickly. >>>CrazyBird: which caused the program to essentially play a random move. >>>SJLIM: fishbait : for crazybird: I think a lot of people condemn IBM for not >>>having Deep Blue play in more matches after beating Kasparov. Is that fair? >>>CrazyBird: the team was burned out, and the only possible opponent was accusing >>>ibm of cheating... >>>SJLIM: Tennis : my question for crazybird is what computer program language was >>>deep blue written in? >>>CrazyBird: as i said earlier, kasparov had his chances, but he blew it. >>>CrazyBird: tennis was asking me this question. >>>SJLIM: Yes.. I believe chessbase covered the story of the rematch between >>>yourself and kasparov's agent for those that wish to learn more.. >>>CrazyBird: it is in c, not c++, due to historical reason. the number of lines is >>>in the order of hundreds of thousands. >>>CrazyBird: the initial dt-2 code is much smaller though. >>>SJLIM: Yonney : please tell me if DBlue is able to beat kasparov now that he's >>>in his twightlight career? >>>CrazyBird: i have the number somewhere in the book. don't remember offhand. >>>SJLIM: Get the book folks! =) >>>SJLIM: Question: If IBM has no intention of ever letting DB play again, why do >>>you think the evaluation function would still be under NDA, so to speak? >>>CrazyBird: well, it would be hard, with deep blue distributed between museum(s) >>>and ibm. >>>CrazyBird: smithsonian is getting one frame. computer history museum might be >>>getting some cards as well. >>>CrazyBird: it seems deep blue is getting old faster than kasparov:). >>>SJLIM: unfortunately =) >>>CrazyBird: next? >>>SJLIM: there was a question about NDA.. >>>SJLIM: Question: If IBM has no intention of ever letting DB play again, why do >>>you think the evaluation function would still be under NDA, so to speak? >>>SJLIM: sorry if you had answered it? >>>CrazyBird: well, i don't have the evaluation function. ibm was keeping the >>>option open, just in case. >>>SJLIM: I see.. >>>CrazyBird: anyway, i don't have an nda with ibm regarding to the software >>>evaluation function. >>>CrazyBird: i do have the hardware evaluation function, but that is under nda. >>>SJLIM: sorry. >>>CrazyBird: any more questions? or any followup question? >>>SJLIM: I got hit with a wave of lag. >>>SJLIM: TheFischerKing : computers always seem to be weak in the endgame >>>phase...why is this? is it a very human phase of the game requiring a method of >>>thinking a machine simply cannot reproduce? do you see this problem being solved >>>in the near future?? >>>CrazyBird: that is my least favorite part of the game. >>>CrazyBird: there is no way around it. you just do something with the knowledge >>>required. >>>CrazyBird: lots of special circuits were added in deep blue for the endgame. >>>SJLIM: Joseph-K : My question for CrazyBird is what have you learnt about your >>>programme given it's play against the world champion? >>>CrazyBird: i had not figured out how to do coordination squares though. >>>SJLIM: coordination squares? >>>CrazyBird: anyway, nasty stuff. part of the reason why shogi is more >>>interesting:). >>>SJLIM: It will be interesting to see what you come up with in the world of >>>Shogi! >>>CrazyBird: that is, some king ending, you can draw only if you can coordinate >>>your king with opp's. >>>SJLIM: I see.. opposition and triangulation! =) >>>SJLIM: my question is: Murray Campbell uses co-ordinate squares in his Ph.D. >>>thesis extensively -- why were you and he unable to get that happening? was this >>>only due to time constraints? >>>SJLIM: I assume these are the very same coordinate squares. >>>CrazyBird: the algorithm for calculating the squares are not easily >>>parallelizable... >>>SJLIM: julio-cesar : My question for CrazyBird is Did you think that, if the >>>Turing test should be done over a chessboard, in, say 5 to 10 years, you could >>>find computers playing really like humans, in an indistinguishable way? >>>CrazyBird: anyway, back to your last question. what i learned from the match >>>with kasparov? >>>SJLIM: opps. >>>CrazyBird: i need a long rest from computer chess:). >>>SJLIM: heh >>>CrazyBird: that is an interesting suggestion about turing test. but it may be >>>hard to do. >>>CrazyBird: scientists like easily doable experiments. we are lazy, you know. >>>SJLIM: =) >>>CrazyBird: my wife is cooking something smelling really good. >>>SJLIM: I was about to say.. >>>CrazyBird: i may have to leave soon. it is nice to talk to you all. >>>SJLIM: I think we've answered alot of questions.. but unforunately.. there are >>>so many more. >>>SJLIM: Thank you so much for agreeing to come back to answer more questions >>>Crazybird. =) >>>SJLIM: I guess we all look forward to Kasparovs game with Deep Junior. >>>CrazyBird: you are welcome. yes, that should be doubly interesting now. >>>SJLIM: I'd like to wish you all the best in your quest to dominate Shogi! =) >>>CrazyBird: it is just for fun. >>>SJLIM: Folks. Alot of questions that you may have asked are answered in Hsu's >>>book - Behind Deep Blue: Building the Computer That Defeated the World Chess >>>Champion by Feng-Hsiung Hsu >>>SJLIM: or in the preview interview.. we will put up a mega transcript of both >>>interviews on ICC as well as on TWIC I hope. >>>SJLIM: Thank you once again CB Hsu. Enjoy your breakfast. >>>SJLIM: Thanks to everyone for your participation. =) >>>CrazyBird: once again, thanks for coming. good bye.
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.