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 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.