Author: Jorge Pichard
Date: 03:32:05 01/30/03
Go up one level in this thread
On January 30, 2003 at 04:44:11, Dann Corbit wrote: >On January 30, 2003 at 04:37:45, Daniel Clausen wrote: > >>On January 30, 2003 at 03:16:48, Jorge Pichard wrote: >> >>>In this critical position where Kasparov mentioned that the mistake was probably >>>21.b4? We should pit different programs of similar strength such as: >>>Shredder 7 vs Deep Junior, Deep Frit7 vs Deep Junior and altenate white and >>>black for each program. Allow each program to finish the game by using a time >>>control of 6 Minutes per move. Also Take the position from move 25....f4 26.h3 >>>and do the same. It is preferable to do this test only if you have a computer >>>equal = or greater > than 2.0 Ghz and preferably a Dual either an AMD MP or a >>>Dual Intel Xeon. Please provide your result ASAP. >>> >>>[D]2b2rk1/rp5p/3p1qpQ/2nPpp2/p1P5/R7/PPBN1PPP/4R1K1 w - - avoid 21.b4? >> >>I find such tests pretty useless, to be honest. If the computers don't >>understand how to play a certain position, what exactly do you want to conclude >>from the results of this computer-experiment? >> >>It's like playing a comp-comp tournament after the moves "d4 d5" and drawing >>conclusions about how well they play the queenspawn-gambit. ;) [how however that >>is called exactly] > >Another difficulty with the experiment is with the hardware. Nobody is going to >have the souped-up mother-ship that Deep Junior 8 is running on. So the time >control would have to be very long to emulate the same conditions. > >Naturally, if "some program or other" does better, people would use that to >demonstrate the superiority of "some program or other" but it would demonstrate >nothing of the sort. The computer after searching a lot of nodes could get the right moves even without understanding of the position, and by usging different programs you could see different output base on the starting position. The position is very tactical so it may be interesting to look at the lines that are already posted and see if other programs such as Shredder 7 and Deep Fritz 7 could still draw even if you have to let your computer calculate up to 20 minutes per move depending on your hardware. The purpose for this test would be to determine if the game could still end up in a draw. Of course it would NOT be the same as getting Kasparov to play the other side vs the program, since the same was already agrred to be a Draw. Another point is that computer don't get tire and after several hours of Analysis between programs of similar strength, you can still make a good judgement of what the possible outcome should have been. Pichard. > >Even at that, I'd like to see it done.
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.