Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Selective Search vs. Brute Force Re: Chris

Author: José de Jesús García Ruvalcaba

Date: 09:56:39 01/30/99

Go up one level in this thread


On January 29, 1999 at 19:20:50, Melvin S. Schwartz wrote:

>
>On January 29, 1999 at 18:10:02, José de Jesús García Ruvalcaba wrote:
>
>>On January 29, 1999 at 17:46:45, Melvin S. Schwartz wrote:
>>
>>>According to the manual of my Mephisto atlanta, it states:
>>>"The program in this chess computer normally uses a Selective Search algorithm.
>>>This allows the computer to see combinations that would otherwise take much
>>>longer to compute. Turning this option off by choosing -SEL makes the program
>>>switch to a powerful Brute Force algorithm. This search method minimizes the
>>>risk of an occasional oversight. Note: The Problem Solving Levels always use the
>>>Brute Force method."
>>>This explanation of the two types of searches would seem to me that Brute Force
>>>would see what Selective Search can see and more since it minimizes the risk of
>>>an occasional oversight. And it seems that since Selective Search is faster, it
>>>wouldn't go as deep as Brute Force. I know it is somewhat confusing comparing
>>>all to what you said. Now, can you make some sense of it knowing what the manual
>>>says? If the tech guy in Hong Kong is wrong, then he should be selling shoes
>>>instead being a technician. Seriously, I would appreciate your evaluation of
>>>what the manual says.
>>>Thank you,
>>>Mel
>>
>>       I do not have a Mephisto Atlanta; I answer from what I have read about brute
>>force and selective search in general.
>>       At the same time control, both search algorithms will see very differente
>>things. The brute force one will look at all the variations to about the same
>>depth; while the selective search will look much deeper to some variations than
>>others, its longest variations will be much longer that those of the brute force
>>method.
>>       The selective search method risks an oversight in its less deep variations. The
>>brute force method wastes a lot of time in irrelevant moves.
>
>Thank you for responding. However, my real question is still not answered. Which
>method produces a higher chess rating. In other words, when they rate these
>machines; for example, the Novag Diamond 11 Swedish ELO 2220 and the Mephisto
>atlanta Swedish ELO 2280, which method do they use? Selective Search or Brute
>Force. Which method produces a higher level of chess??? Which method is
>better??? The manual of my Mephisto does state that Brute Force is used in the
>Problem Solving Levels. There must be a reason why they have designed the chess
>computer to operate that way. Anyone with information regardng this confusing
>issue would be appreciated.
>Thank you,
>Mel

	As far as I understand, the SSDF rates the machines with their default
settings. For your Atlanta mahcine it means the selective search. I do not know
if it plays chess better or worse than with brute force.
	There is no way to compare the two methods in general: there are too many ways
to be selective, and they can produce very different results. If you get two
Atlanta machines, you can play a match between its selective search against its
brute force search, but that will only have meaning for the Atlanta and the
results could not be extrapolated.
	I think brute force is used to solve problems because many key moves in
composed positions are very unnatural, and would be quickly rejected by the
selective search after a shallow search (the machine needs a deeper search to
find they are good moves).



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.