Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Fruit 2 and endgame play

Author: Dann Corbit

Date: 18:10:25 01/12/05

Go up one level in this thread


On January 12, 2005 at 20:30:28, Uri Blass wrote:

>On January 12, 2005 at 20:23:57, Dann Corbit wrote:
>
>>On January 12, 2005 at 19:40:26, chandler yergin wrote:
>>
>>>On January 12, 2005 at 18:55:04, Dann Corbit wrote:
>>>
>>>>On January 12, 2005 at 18:49:06, chandler yergin wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On January 12, 2005 at 18:45:47, Dann Corbit wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>On January 12, 2005 at 17:49:17, chandler yergin wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>On January 12, 2005 at 17:39:55, Uri Blass wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>On January 12, 2005 at 13:31:16, chandler yergin wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>On January 12, 2005 at 10:54:26, Anthony Cozzie wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>On January 12, 2005 at 02:33:38, Jouni Uski wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>In my (private) endgame testsuite Fruit scored better than some programs
>>>>>>>>>>>with tablebase support (e.g. Junior8 and Crafty).
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>Quite stunning - it seems,
>>>>>>>>>>>that excellent search depth compensates TBs!
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Your opinion.. Provide evidence!
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> And my suite has some 5/6 piece
>>>>>>>>>>>positions were TB access is definitely advantage.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>Jouni
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>IMO the 5-piece tablebases are just not that interesting and really not worth
>>>>>>>>>>that much in terms of elo.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>What are the Current ELO Ratings for Top Programs, including yours?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>THey represents exact play, and all positions possible are immediatly shown.
>>>>>>>>>What more can you expect?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> A little endgame knowledge can cover most of the
>>>>>>>>>>positions and be a lot faster too.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Absolute NONSENSE!
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Not nonsense.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>In most of the position of 5 pieces or less than it computers can find the right
>>>>>>>>move with no tablebases.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Uri
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Nonsense Uri!
>>>>>>>They "May" find it... Ha Ha.. in how long!
>>>>>>>Stop the Crap!
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Suppose that a tablebase takes 2 days to create today.
>>>>>>Next year it will take one day to create it.
>>>>>>The following year, it will take 12 hours.
>>>>>>Year 3: 6 hours
>>>>>>Year 4: 3 hours
>>>>>>Year 5: 90 minutes
>>>>>>Year 6: 45 minutes
>>>>>>Year 7: 22.5 minutes
>>>>>>Year 8: 11.25 minutes
>>>>>>Year 9: 5.625 minutes
>>>>>>Year 10: 2.8125 minutes
>>>>>>Year 11: 1.40625 minutes
>>>>>>Year 12: 42.1875 seconds
>>>>>>Year 13: 21.09375 seconds
>>>>>>Year 14: 10.546875 seconds
>>>>>>Year 15: 5.2734375 seconds
>>>>>>Year 16: 2.63671875 seconds
>>>>>>Year 17: 1.318359375 seconds
>>>>>>Year 18: 0.6591796875 of a second
>>>>>>Year 19: 0.32958984375 of a second
>>>>>>Year 20: 0.164794921875 of a second.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>What that means is that perfect information will be generated in a fraction of a
>>>>>>second, if that is what is desired.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>This is a conservative estimate, since compute power seems to be growing
>>>>>>superexponentially, rather than just exponentially.
>>>>>
>>>>>Key Word:
>>>>>"Seems"
>>>>>
>>>>>There is a Practical Limit!
>>>>>There is not enough time even to the end of the World to "Brute Force"
>>>>>all possible combinations... Until you do, there is NO Proof of anything!
>>>>>Now if you can't understand that.. I'm sorry!
>>>>
>>>>The computer does not have to calculate chess perfectly to the end.  It only has
>>>>to outcalculate its opponent.
>>>
>>>Reminds me of the story wehn Einstein & Nils Bohr
>>>were hiking in the woods...
>>>They came accross a huge grizzly bear..
>>>Nils bent down and started going through his backpack, pulled out , and started
>>>putting on his Tennis shoes..
>>>"VAT are you doing Nils?".. said Einstein,
>>>"You can't outrun that Bear!"
>>>
>>>Nils replied.. "I only have to outrun YOU, Dr. Einstein!"
>>>
>>>
>>>  Very soon, humans will have no chance against
>>>>computers.
>>>
>>>The Opening Tree.. the Opening Book is a DataBase of Positions PLAYED!
>>>
>>>Humans determine Theory! Programs "Store & Retrieve" information..
>>>
>>>In a  Game of Human vs Computers...
>>>Humans are playing what Top GM's have played before!
>>>Computers have NO Intelligence! You know that!
>>>ONLY when by "Advanced Chess...Humans USING Computers to advance Theory
>>>will the ELO Rating of Humans & Computers advance..
>>>Humans.. have to PLay the games FIRST!
>>>NOW.. The Formula for ELO Ratings is such that for GM'S, they Win or Lose
>>>very FEW POINTS for a loss among their Peers!
>>>Therefore.. ELO Ratings will NOT JUMP! For either Humans OR Computers.
>>
>>Intelligence is not needed to play the game of chess.  Only compute power and
>>storage.  It is just like any other game with a deterministic tree.
>>
>>It will be a few years longer until GO is solved, but in 20 years, the best GO
>>players will also be slaughtered by a computer.
>
>We do not know it.

True.  It is the most likely outcome, however.

>We even do not know that chess will be solved and it is only a possibility
>
>I also think that the difference between solving chess and solving go is big and
>solving chess is clearly easier problem and machine that is 1000000 times faster
>and have 1000000 time more memory than the machine that is needed to solve chess
>will be unable to solve go.

Then, in log2(1000000) years, we will solve the other after the first.
Less than 20 years is not such a long time to wait if you are a curious fellow.




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.