Author: Amir Ban
Date: 14:49:30 11/23/98
Go up one level in this thread
On November 23, 1998 at 17:14:28, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On November 23, 1998 at 11:50:01, Amir Ban wrote: > >>On November 23, 1998 at 09:37:25, Robert Hyatt wrote: >> >>>On November 22, 1998 at 11:49:54, blass uri wrote: >>> >>>> >>>>I did not ask for all the tree but only the tree up to the point that my >>>>programs can see by search of 3 minutes that black has at least 1 pawn >>>>advantage. >>>> >>>>This is clearly less positions >>>>because if in the leaves it is -2.xx then Junior can see some moves before the >>>>leaves that it is -1.xx >>> >>> >>>ok... rather than 10 million pages, it might only be 1 million pages. How >>>would we get those to you? :) >>> >> >>I wonder how many people reading the last few posts of this thread have been >>reminded of the story of the King's New Clothes. >> >> >>>what you are overlooking is the point that junior (and all the other programs) >>>look at a fat, shallow tree. >> >>I am quite sure that the opposite is true. All PC programs have a much smaller >>effective branching factor than DT/DB. This is because they all do forward >>pruning, many of them aggressively, while DT/DB did none, and they do >>extensions, most at least as much as DT/DB, and at least in Junior, much more >>aggressively than DT/DB. >> >> > >I'm going to try to keep this simple. Here is a point-blank question: if you >really believe that nonsensical statement you wrote above, then how can you >reconcile that with a program that is searching at least 1,000 times faster >than you, yet only gets to depth 10-11 in the game? If they are not extending >far more than you could ever hope to then exactly *what* are they doing with >that factor of 1,000? And remember that they have a pretty simple quiescence >search and they toss out bummer captures as well, so the work is *not* in >looking at zillions of captures. > >now, in light of that, if you believe that "you extend much more aggressively >than they do" then *where* are those nodes of theirs *going*??? You have a >printout to look at. Ought to be able to answer that somehow... > I answered this in the first paragraph you snipped. Instructions to the reader: To get the simple answer to Bob's simple question, go up two posts, and look at the question and answer that followed the one above. > >And then we will return to the definition of "hyperbole"... Amir
This page took 0.01 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.