Author: Jonas Cohonas
Date: 04:12:04 05/30/05
Go up one level in this thread
>According to the logs that I saw, deep blue was searching 12 plies deep in the >K-DB match. My program can match that depth on a 1.1Ghz PC. This is because of >search techniques that were not used in deep blue. Eg: Null move, Rebel style >reductions, aggressive pruning. Hydra is obviously using such search techniques, >and given its higher processing power, it will easily outsearch Deep Blue. In >fact, in Shredder-Hydra match, shredder was searching to 16 ply (I think, but I >could be wrong) which was almost the same as Hydra (Again, not sure). > >Also, Deep Blue was using Singular Extensions, which increases the number of >nodes required in search. > >Also note that 9 plies of program 1 are not the same as 9 plies of program 2. >These programs may be using different search techniques/extensions etc, and >therefore on basis of plies searched you cannot guess the relative strength of >programs. For instance, singular extensions are reputed to increase tactical >strength quite a bit, but they may decrease the depth of search. > >Pallav The way i understand it, and please correct me if i am wrong, all programs have different ways of searching and reaches different depths, for example let's say that chessmaster (theking) was running on hardware that made it search 40 million pos. per second, it would probably still not reach the same depths as say Shredder (on fast hardware) which can reach between 16-20 in about 15 min on my 2.8 ghz. My point is that a program that runs 40 million positions per second and dosn't "go as deep" as it's opponent running much slower, dosn't mean that it is getting out-searched per se.
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.