Author: Tony Werten
Date: 04:55:09 10/30/03
Go up one level in this thread
On October 29, 2003 at 03:15:23, Jorge Pichard wrote: >"Experiments in Chinook show that there comes a point where increased search >depth provides diminishing returns." > >From a mathematical game theory point of view, checkers is a simpler game than >chess. There are only 5x1020 positions (5 with 20 zeros after it) in checkers, >whereas chess has at least 1040 positions. Knowing this how long it will take to >reach diminishing returns in chess? > >http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=1270 It's still very questionable if there are diminishing returns. It depends on how you define it. If two programs play with 5 vs 6 ply search, the second engine has a 20% depth advantage. With 10 vs 11 it's only 10%. So ofcoarse the difference in wins is smaller. My car drives 10 km/h faster than yours. If you drive 50 km/h our difference in arrival time is 20 %, if you drive 100, it's only 10%. Is that diminishing returns ? Diminishing returns are only proven (IMO) if 6 vs 5 wins more games than 12 vs 10 because only then are you comparing something linear and you give a linear advantage. Compare it with a germ colony that gets 3x as big with every timeunit. Colony 2 get's one time unit extra. Now the play a game. A random number is choosen between the amount of timeunits. Same story 6 vs 5 will win 20% more, 11 vs 10 will win 10%. But colony 2 is 3x as big in size !! Not important. Give a constant sizeadvantage there will be diminishing returns. Given a percentile timeunit advantage, there won't be. Now replace timeunit with searchdepth and size with searchtime :) Tony
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.