Author: Uri Blass
Date: 23:24:58 06/12/03
Go up one level in this thread
On June 13, 2003 at 00:08:32, Mike Byrne wrote: >On June 12, 2003 at 22:44:25, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: > >>On June 11, 2003 at 21:06:15, Mike Byrne wrote: >> >> >> >>>On June 11, 2003 at 00:28:29, K. Burcham wrote: >>> >>>> >>>>we can say that with todays hardware, todays programs wont play >>>>36.axb5 axb5 37.Be4 in tournament time control. there are several programs that >>>>will play these three moves if given enough time, for example, Deep Sjeng 1.5 in >>>>8 hours. >>>> >>> >>> >>>after I posted that, I realized I was thinking "normal time controls" but if >>>somebody left their program running a very long time -- it might find it. I >> >>Let's be clear. Deep Blue just searched 10 or 11 ply there. >> >>Because of hashtables we get that very quick nowadays. At 30 seconds a move >>you already outsearch deep blue in these positions. >> >>That's why when Be4 showed up at 11 ply at the time in DIEP and in Crafty and >>also in Deep Blue is no big of a surprise. >> >>We got simply deeper with more time because of hashtables. >> >>So comparing something that searched 10-11 ply with a simplistic evaluation to >>modern chessprograms is simply pathetic. > >Deep Blue is simplistic evaluation - that's not true. Why do you say that? Is >this something Dr. Hsu told you? Think about what you're saying - Deep blue >searched about 200M NPS- that is still 40-50x faster than any top of line PC SMP >machine today. Are you taking into the considerations of Deep blue extensions - >Dr Hsu in his book regarding this position said that the main line was at least >24 ply deep and maybe over 40 ply deep (pg 229) (accounting was not one of DB >strengths). I agree that 11 plies of deeper blue are probably more than 11 plies of programs of today but I do not believe that they are equivalent to more than 13 plies of Shredder or Fritz and these programs on a fast hardware can get usually deeper. I think that the important thing is the quality of the evaluation and not the complexity of it. I do not claim that the evaluation of deeper blue was simpler than the evaluation of today programs(we have no way to compare when we do not have the evaluations) but I tend to believe that the quality of the evaluation of the programs of today is better. It is not something against Hsu. Deeper blue was something that was ready only in the last moment so they had no time to tune their evaluation when the programmers of the top programs have many years to tune their evaluation. Uri
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.