Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Deep Shredder (2 processors) x Rybka ?

Author: Robert Hyatt

Date: 21:25:03 01/15/06

Go up one level in this thread


On January 15, 2006 at 23:21:31, Albert Silver wrote:

>>But in general, deeper search is stronger than shallower search, all else being
>>equal.
>
>Reading this threw me off on a funny tangent, because in my mind I automatically
>added "until it makes no difference", meaning that if a possible path to victory
>or draw exists from a certain position, it will be found. So if a 70-ply deep
>engine could find all the right moves, then a 75-ply deep engine would make no
>difference.
>
>Anyhow, I then wondered whether the phenomenon of diminishing returns wasn't in
>fact the ultimate sign that perfect chess is ultimately a draw. After all, if
>chess was ultimately a big 1-0 then greater depth and precision (drawing closer
>to this perfect win) should lead to more wins and losses and not less, no?
>
>                                       Albert


Interesting thought.  Although you are thinking straight line, when it might be
a curve that first flattens for a long while appearing to be settling in on a
draw score, but going even deeper suddenly accelerates the curve back toward
winning again...

But I would not be surprised if it ended up as a dead draw with perfect play.
Although when you think about the game, one simple tempi ought not be enough to
win, if the world is fair.  :)





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.