Author: Günther Simon
Date: 01:20:50 07/01/05
Go up one level in this thread
On June 30, 2005 at 21:47:25, Robin Smith wrote: >On June 30, 2005 at 20:29:42, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On June 30, 2005 at 16:08:32, Andreas Guettinger wrote: >> >>>On June 30, 2005 at 11:34:18, Evgeny Shu wrote: >>> >>>>http://chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=2485 >>> >>> >>>Now this surprises me a bit: >>> >>>"I wasn’t really concerned about that possibility. In any case it would be >>>impossible for me to tell, because Hydra plays a very different game to any >>>other computer that I ever saw. Even in these six games it actually played >>>differently to anything I saw in its own previous games, so it’s not easy to >>>judge. But no, I don’t have any suspicions about human intervention. That’s not >>>something that concerned me." >>> >>>A replayed the matches live on Hiarcs 9.6 and Fruit 2.1 on my 2 computers, and I >>>would say above 95% of Hydras moves were suggested by at least one of them. >>>Especially Fruit did very well in predicting Hydras moves. >>>Therefore the sentence "Hydra palys a very different game to any other computer >>>that I ever saw" leaves me a bit out in the cold. >>> >>>regrads >>>Andy >> >> >>It's a little hyperbole and a lot of exaggeration. :) I had crafty analyzing >>most of the games live on ICC and it as well as most other programs predicted >>Hydras moves _very_ accurately... > >Please define "_very_ accurately". 100% of the time? :-) Or are you running >Crafty (or pehaps a stable of engines) and noticing that the engine(s), at some >depth or another, show the same move as Hydra most of the time. How often did >Crafty come up with the same move as Hydra when given the exact same amount of >thinking time? I haven't tested this, but I'll bet it is less than 95%. > >And even if Crafty did predict Adams' moves (once out of book) perhaps as much >as 95% of the time, even that does not mean that Hydra didn't put much more >pressure on Adams than Crafty or other PC engines would have. At the highest >levels of chess it only takes a move or two per game to make a big difference. >One slip by the computer and the presure is off. More presure->"very different >game" (at least from a subjective human perspective such as Adams') even if all >the other moves would have been the same. Well, I am sure that most decent programs play at least >95% of Hydras moves in those games and in the last <5% it is of no matter if they will, because the position is already lost for the Human. You know why it is like that - it's just because of Adams opening choice in all games. Yes, I know you can't believe it - play certain 1.e4 e5 lines vs. any decent program above Crafty level and they will get a boost of perhaps 200 Elo. >Then there is also the issue of opening books. Hydra leaves book faster than >most top programs, because the Hydra team believes Hydra handles being out of >book and finding good TN's better than other programs. Leaving book earlier is >already, all by itself, a radically different game, in spite of how many of >Hydra's subsequent moves the PC's might find. > >I am certain Adams has played many games against PC engines. I am certain he has not(many). Analysing with programs or preparation against other GMs with program's help is definetely _ not_ the same. Guenther > I am certain Hydra >seemed subjectively, to Adams, as stronger and harder to handle than these PC >programs. This means that Adams statement "Hydra plays a very different game" >would, from Adams' perspective, be completely true; even though PC's can predict >most of Hydra's moves. > >I think your claim above regarding Adams could be a little hyperbole and a lot >of exaggeration. :) > >-Robin
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.