Author: Uri Blass
Date: 05:05:06 08/31/04
Go up one level in this thread
On August 31, 2004 at 07:58:11, Uri Blass wrote: >On August 31, 2004 at 01:50:55, Sandro Necchi wrote: > >>On August 30, 2004 at 23:43:12, Robert Hyatt wrote: >> >>>On August 30, 2004 at 21:57:13, Anthony Cozzie wrote: >>> >>>>On August 30, 2004 at 16:59:37, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>>> >>>>>On August 30, 2004 at 16:23:25, Anthony Cozzie wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>On August 30, 2004 at 15:33:19, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>On August 30, 2004 at 14:51:01, Uri Blass wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>On August 30, 2004 at 13:51:48, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>On August 30, 2004 at 12:24:54, Volker Böhm wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>On August 30, 2004 at 10:02:54, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>On August 30, 2004 at 08:30:34, Kurt Utzinger wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>On August 30, 2004 at 08:12:52, Jouni Uski wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>Eine FPGA-Karte untersucht momentan ca. 3 Millionen Positionen/Sekunde. 16 >>>>>>>>>>>>>Karten machen daher theoretisch 48 MPos/sec. (Donninger) >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>Jouni >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> If Hydra made 48 Mpos/sec this again proves (in comparison >>>>>>>>>>>> with the 2 Mpos/sec on Quad-Opteron server with 4 CPU's of >>>>>>>>>>>> Shredder) that the number of pos/sec can't be taken as a >>>>>>>>>>>> reliable value for the goodness of a chess program. It's >>>>>>>>>>>> of course simply impossible to compare apples and organes. >>>>>>>>>>>> Kurt [http://www.utzingerk.com] >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>Don't forget that Hydra ripped Shredder's head off. So the NPS _might_ be >>>>>>>>>>>significant here... >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>Didn´t I´ve heard you saying that 10 games are not enough to draw a >>>>>>>>>>statistically significant conclusion on the playing strength? >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>Greetings Volker >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>With two _close_ opponents, correct. But if one is seriously stronger, as hydra >>>>>>>>>appeared to be, 10 games is plenty. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>We do not know if hydra is seriously stronger. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>We have a pretty good clue that it is. It is over 10x faster, potentially, than >>>>>>>other programs. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>1. I first assume that the programmer / designer is no dummy. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>2. all else being "equal" 10x faster is a _serious_ advantage. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>3. the above two points translate into a signficant strength advantage. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>You cannot start by assuming that hydra is significantly stronger when this is >>>>>>>>the question. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>With evidence, you can. IE I can certainly assume that Crafty on an 8-way >>>>>>>opteron is significantly stronger than Crafty on my dual xeon. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>If you see 10-0 you can say based on the result that Hydra is significantly >>>>>>>>stronger but when you see 5.5-2.5 you cannot claim it based on the result and >>>>>>>>you only can say that you do not know if it is significantly stronger based on >>>>>>>>the result. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>If you only look at the results, maybe or maybe not. But I watched many of the >>>>>>>games with Crafty analyzing. That tells you even more. >>>>>> >>>>>>Hydra is unquestionably very strong, but lets not forget that Shredder lost the >>>>>>first two games out of book. >>>>>> >>>>>>anthony >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>Depends also on the definition of "lost". IE it didn't come out of book at -4 >>>>>or something. It just got rolled in kingside attacks because of castle-opposite >>>>>issues that Hydra seemed to play better. Of course the stronger side often does >>>>>play such positions better. :) >>>> >>>>Of course Hydra is very strong. Its just that I am not willing to throw in the >>>>towel on Shredder and declare Hydra the new WCCC just yet ;) >>>> >>>>anthony >>> >>> >>>With any luck, we'll see how strong they are at the next WCCC next Summer... >> >>Yes, hower there are things that people watching the games do not know and that >>would make superficial conclusions: >> >>1. The first 2 games where book lost. These variations where weak and we played >>them before, so they knew it and could wait us on them. After the book Hydra >>played well, but Shredder had no chance at all. > >Can shredder beat itself from the same variation? > >If it cannot do it then hydra was stronger and if it could do it then it seems >that your preperation was bad because you could discover that the lines were bad >by testing shredder against shredder. In another thought it is not so clear even if Shredder cannot find the good moves of hydra in the first games because if they prepared based on previous games of shredder they could prepare games when hydra beat Shredder8. It is clear that hydra had the advantage of being unknown. 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.