Author: Dana Turnmire
Date: 10:32:29 12/12/04
Go up one level in this thread
On December 12, 2004 at 07:08:13, Chuck wrote: >On December 11, 2004 at 19:14:41, Anthony Cozzie wrote: > >>On December 11, 2004 at 18:51:25, Dana Turnmire wrote: >> >>>In the following diagram the only correct move is Rxa1! Genius finds it after >>>only searching 5 ply and yet the Fidelity Designer 2100 Display (6Mhz) still >>>insists on moving Ne5 after searching 8 ply and over two hours of thinking. >>>Is this not evidence of some flaw in the Designer 2100 evaluation? >>>[d]r1b1r1k1/1p3pbp/1qpp2p1/2n5/2PNP1n1/1PN3PP/3Q1PB1/BR2R1K1 b - - >> >>It mainly evidence that Genius has a good selective search. >> >>anthony > >Yes, I believe the Designer 2100 was pretty much a full-width / brute-force >program, meaning that the Genius was quickly able to throw out some bad lines >while the the Designer 2100 wasted a lot of time considering every bad move. > >Regards, > >Chuck You are right. It takes Genius 7 ten ply and 25 min 51 sec in full search to find it as opposed to 5 seconds with selective search enabled. It shows the superiority of selective search over brute force.
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.