Author: Uri Blass
Date: 08:57:01 11/11/04
Go up one level in this thread
On November 11, 2004 at 11:34:35, Derek Paquette wrote: >On November 11, 2004 at 08:17:36, Uri Blass wrote: > >>On November 11, 2004 at 08:11:03, Uri Blass wrote: >> >>>On November 11, 2004 at 07:44:01, Andrew Platt wrote: >>> >>>>On November 11, 2004 at 02:15:20, Derek Paquette wrote: >>>> >>>>>I play email chess all the time, aswell as blitz games on the net. I also play >>>>>engine matches online and this came across. >>>>> >>>>>If someone were to play an email game, say a Grandmaster vs Me, and I was to use >>>>>a computer, and the return move time was say 5 days a piece. If I were to keep >>>>>Shredder 8 on Infinite analysis for those 5 days per move (say i keep the cpu >>>>>very cool and i give it a few hours of break) >>>>> >>>>>would shredder 8 play a perfect game? or near perfect where the gm would have no >>>>>chance without the assistance of another computer? >>>>> >>>>>I know that the longer the time control the better for the computer but to what >>>>>end? >>>>> >>>>>with 5 days per move, that is 120 hours,(7200min) >>>>>using the starting position as a bench mark for depth vs time, (where shredder 8 >>>>>goes 1 more ply after it doubles its time searching) >>>>> >>>>>I calculate on my athlon 1700xp that after 5 days shredder 8 would reach >>>>>.... >>>>> >>>>>depth 21 in 27 minutes...knowing that... >>>>> >>>>>depth 22 in 54 min >>>>>depth 23 in 108 min >>>>>depth 24 in 216 min >>>>>depth 25 in 432 min >>>>>depth 26 in 864 min >>>>>depth 27 in 1728 min >>>>>depth 28 in 3456 min >>>>>depth 29 in 6912 min >>>>> >>>>>So basically shredder 8 would reach a ply of 29 in just under 5 days... >>>>>could ANY human EVER beat it EVER? without computer assistance? >>>> >>>>Yes of course a human could beat it EVER. If it's a quiet position, the human >>>>could use those 15 moves to significantly improve their position while Shredder >>>>flounders around a bit. >>> >>>Shredder can also use the 15 moves to improve it's position. >>> >>>> >>>>What would work much better, and what I do for post-game analysis of my games, >>>>is to let Shredder think for a while and then move, let it think, move and see >>>>what happens to the position. Or let it play against itself. I often do that, >>>>then find improvements for Shredder, get it to try that out. >>> >>>Shredder could find a lot of these improvement if you give it more time and it >>>can also find improvement that you did not find in that way. >>> >>>Uri >> >>I can add that 29 plies of shredder does not mean that it can see everything in >>the next 14 or 15 moves of both sides. >> >>It is obvious that shredder does a lot of pruning to get that depth. >> >>Uri > >Yes it definately does pruning, but what is your thoughts on a human beating it >at those time controls? 5 days per move. (no computer assistance for the >human) I guess that inspite of the pruning No human will beat it with no computer assistence at 5 days per move. I do not claim that no human can do it but the humans who can do it have no reason to spend time on it because they are smart enough to use their time better(for example toearn money in over the board game). Top correspondence players have hard problems against computers even when they use computer help and using computer help is usually allowed in correspondence games. 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.