Author: Dann Corbit
Date: 12:18:56 01/27/99
Go up one level in this thread
On January 27, 1999 at 14:53:29, Don Dailey wrote: [snip] >Basically this is exactly what I said. However I am willing to accept >convincing results (high match rate by another program) as a "proof" >that we should stop the discussion altogether. I think that especially telling is the bionic v bionic results on slightly different machines in one of Bruce's crosstables. Not much different than Ferret, for that matter. And what we have right now is a single data point. I suspect that re-runs will also give different results. So we will need literally thousands of hours of computer time. And then what will we know? That B.I. is a clone of crafty? We already know that, so it cannot possibly be the goal. If the goal really is to find out what percent of the code in B.I. is original, I think the experiment is rather silly. On the other hand, I am greatly enjoying the data provided so far on its own right. I would like to see time controls posted with the results, though. I think that would make the results much more interesting (to me). Probably Bruce has stated those conditions many times, but I have poor short term memory. If I ever tried blind-fold chess I might have to ask "What game was I playing?" Not as in, "Which board am I on now?", but rather what *GAME* am I playing. [snip]
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.