Author: Dann Corbit
Date: 15:19:59 06/20/05
Go up one level in this thread
On June 20, 2005 at 16:42:38, Uri Blass wrote: >On June 20, 2005 at 16:09:53, Dann Corbit wrote: > >>On June 20, 2005 at 15:42:41, Uri Blass wrote: >> >>>On June 20, 2005 at 15:28:16, Dann Corbit wrote: >>> >>>>On June 19, 2005 at 17:58:07, Uri Blass wrote: >>>> >>>>>On June 19, 2005 at 15:18:33, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>On June 19, 2005 at 02:24:52, Roger D Davis wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>Since Fruit is just a notch down from Shredder and Fritz, it looks like that >>>>>> >>>>>>Fruit is lightyears away from Shredder. >>>>>> >>>>>>something that might play well in 1 0 because it gets instantly 11 or 12 ply, >>>>>>doesn't mean it is having a chance in some serious time control like 60 in 2 >>>>>>under tournament conditions. >>>>> >>>>>I do not know if Fruit has problems at long time control(results at 40/40 >>>>>adapted to speed of PIV 2 ghz suggest that it is number 2 after shredder at >>>>>longer time control than 1 minute per game at least if you use nunn type match) >>>>>but if it has problems the logical reason that I can see is bugs in the search >>>>>that prevent it to go deep enough. >>>>> >>>>>I already mentioned one bug of extending single replies too much so fruit can >>>>>solve the famous mate in 30 in 1 seconds and probably cause it to extend often >>>>>useless lines in games). >>>>> >>>>>Fabien wrote that there are bugs in the search that he still had no time to fix >>>>>so he probably meant that there is more than one bug. >>>>> >>>>>It is possible that Fruit is weaker at long time control(not in nunn type games) >>>>>because of positional learning of shredder but I guess that the part of >>>>>positional learning can be done by fabien. >>>> >>>>There is very limited data, but the results I have seen seem to indicate that >>>>fruit is even stronger at slower time controls. >>> >>>1)I see that I made a mistake in my post >>>I meant to say that fruit can solve the mate in 30 at depth 1(not in one >>>second). >>> >>>I think that it is wrong and may cause problems espacailly at long time control >>>because my guess is that these single reply extensions(instead of partial >>>extensions) increase the branching factor of fruit with no significant benefit. >>> >>>2)The data that I see based on reading posts give me no information if fruit is >>>better at long time control. >> >>Did you see the 90 minute plus 30 second contest? > >Yes > >I saw fruit is leading 4-1 against Shredder9(and fruit is losing the 6th game) >but there are more games at 40/40 time control at CEGT and in this tournament >Fruit is only number 3 at this moment after Fritz. > >I also saw results when Fruit beated Fritz at blitz >see http://wbforum.volker-pittlik.name/viewtopic.php?t=2867 > >Fruit-Fritz 52.5-47.5 > >I can only say that nothing is clear based on the results. Of course, I agree with this. We will need thousands of games before we have a clear picture. But I do not see any evidence that fruit is weaker at long time control than short. If anything, the evidence leans the other way. At any rate, after a couple weeks of information gathering, then we will know very well.
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.