Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

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

Author: Robert Hyatt

Date: 07:27:58 06/02/05

Go up one level in this thread


On June 01, 2005 at 22:51:24, Jeremiah Penery wrote:

>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



I believe there was a full description in the JICCA.  I am out of the office
this week but will see.  I "think" I scanned a copy and sent it to Gian-Carlo a
couple of years back when he was playing around with this using Crafty as the
test-bed...  You might ask him if that is correct and if he still has the
electronic copy...




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.