Author: Amir Ban
Date: 15:47:20 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: > >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. Seems like you misunderstand another side of this, because you are mistaking me for a null-mover. To get to nominal ply 11, I would have to search at least to my (half-ply) depth 21. If you've ever seen Junior play, you know that that's a lot for a middlegame position. I'm guessing it will take Junior at least a few days to get there. When I do get to that depth, though, I expect to see much more than Deep Blue sees at its ply 11, because I'm much more heavily extended, and of that, I'm sure. 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.