Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: How is Hydra faster and better than Deep Blue?

Author: Jeremiah Penery

Date: 19:51:24 06/01/05

Go up one level in this thread


On June 01, 2005 at 17:25:18, Robert Hyatt wrote:

>On May 31, 2005 at 21:46:46, Jeremiah Penery wrote:
>
>>On May 30, 2005 at 13:37:55, Gian-Carlo Pascutto wrote:
>>
>>>On May 30, 2005 at 11:27:46, Ricardo Gibert wrote:
>>
>>>SE needs a lot of extra searching to establish singularity.
>>>
>>>>Thank you for reinforcing my disinterest in SE.
>>>
>>>It's possible to do better than the DB implementation/method.
>>
>>Does anyone even know exactly what the DB implementation/method for SE was?
>
>
>As described in Hsu/Campbell's last paper on the topic...

I knew they had given some details and a vague overview, but I had never heard
(or read) anywhere that they had fully described their implementation.  At least
not in a way that would make it possible for someone to 'copy' it.

Just did some looking.  The only paper I can find that they wrote about SE was
in 1990, and I can't find a copy easily available.  The paper they wrote in 2002
about Deep Blue doesn't really talk about SE, though it does describe their
dual-credit extension algorithm.
Is the 1990 paper the one you're talking about, and do you happen to have a copy
if so?

Thanks,
Jeremiah



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.