Author: Uri Blass
Date: 18:25:31 07/04/03
Go up one level in this thread
On July 04, 2003 at 20:42:15, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: >On July 04, 2003 at 19:08:50, Uri Blass wrote: > >>On July 04, 2003 at 18:42:59, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: >> >>>On July 04, 2003 at 16:33:50, Uri Blass wrote: >>> >>>>On July 04, 2003 at 15:44:53, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: >>>> >>>>>On July 04, 2003 at 11:38:09, Andrew Williams wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>On July 04, 2003 at 11:18:58, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>On July 03, 2003 at 13:57:02, Dann Corbit wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>On July 03, 2003 at 12:28:05, Ralph Stoesser wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>Dear chess programmers, >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>What are your personal experiences with the MTD(f) search introduced by Aske >>>>>>>>>Plaat some years ago? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>It does not work for me as well as it does for some others. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>I think success will depend very much on your particular engine. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>Andrew Williams has a successful implementation. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Claims to have a successful implementation is more near the truth. >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>I am a bit surprised to read this. I sincerely hope you're not claiming that I'm >>>>>>lying about my implementation? >>>>> >>>>>No i just said that you *claim* to have a successful implementation. >>>>> >>>>>I didn't say a word more or less than that. I would be the last in the world to >>>>>suggest you are a liar as everyone knows you are honest. >>>>> >>>>>I did imply however that i doubt that your implementation of MTD will use less >>>>>nodes on average when all the participants of the world champs 2003 would get >>>>>rid of the PVS that they use and use MTD instead. >>>> >>>>1)I do not think that the question if you have succesful implementation is >>>>dependent on what other do. >>>>Succesful implementation is something that is better than what you did >>>>before doing it. >>>> >>>>2)You cannot know what other are going to do. >>>>You even cannot know the list of the participants because some participants may >>>>decide only later if to participate so >>>>"all the participants of the world champs 2003 would get rid of the PVS... " has >>>>no basis. >>>> >>>>Uri >>> >>>We can get lengthy discussions, but did you read what i wrote about Aske Plaat? >>> >>>He could *never* have concluded that at a 512 processor origin MTD worked for >>>him. >>> >>>It is impossible that it *ever* works there for sure. >>> >>>Even those who have implemented MTD agree. >>> >>>Now second thing is. Some programs MTD won't work for sure because they use Pawn >>>=1000. Ok end of story for those programs. They are forced to use PVS. >>> >>>then we keep left with a big group of programs pawn=100. carefully skipping >>>fritz of course which is doing some sort of combination PVS with sometimes >>>skipping plies using a single bound. Though that isn't exactly MTD, it sure >>>isn't using enough to call it MTD. >>> >>>Now we know from all the commercial guys that they have extensively experimented >>>with all search algorithms. >> >>How do you know? >>I do not know. >>personally I do not plan even to try mtd. > >You do not plan to show up at any world champs you said and you for sure aren't >a commercial engine and no one i know at least has any intention to take your >grande offer to cooperate with you in order to use your creative ideas like >playing for the book 1.h3 as a matter of a test. I will probably not play but no promise(if I understand correctly I have some months that I can change my mind) and 1.h3 is good enough if the engine is strong enough. 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.