Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: ELO Rating of DB jr. @120M NPS ??? (look out Garry K)

Author: J. Wesley Cleveland

Date: 11:25:05 05/14/99

Go up one level in this thread


On May 14, 1999 at 13:14:36, KarinsDad wrote:

>On May 14, 1999 at 05:24:20, Peter Hegger wrote:
>
>>Hello
>>Let's say that today's best programs, Fritz, CM6000, junior etc.. are playing at
>>the 2450 level at 40/2 when they've got hardware capable of knocking off .5M
>>nps. I don't think this is too outlandish an assumption.
>>If you double this speed 8 times over you arrive at 128M nps. This is in the
>>same ballpark as this new proposed screamer of Hsu's which it is estimated will
>>knock off 120M nps on a multi-processor platform.
>>I've seen in other threads that doubling speed will increase performance
>>anywhere from 30-70 points per doubling. For argument's sake and to split the
>>difference I'll assume that 50 is likely pretty close. Using 2450 as the base
>>this would translate into an elo of 2850 give or take a bit.
>>Is it really possible that a machine which is stronger (marginally) rating wise
>>than the world champion is right around the corner. Or am I missing something
>>here in making this estimate?
>>In any event I'd love to see Kasparov tackle this baby in a 40/2 24 game match.
>>Bets anyone? :)
>>Regards
>>Peter
>
>As stated in other posts, the 30-70 points per doubling starts dropping at the
>larger elos, so using conventional chess theory, this might result in a rating
>of 2700 or so.
>
>However, consider the following:
>
>At 120 mnps, you could calculate ALL moves (i.e. exhaustive search) for most
>positions to ply 6 in about 8 seconds. In a 40/2 game, this would leave you with
>about 172 seconds per move to calculate normally (minmax) beyond ply 6. This
>would mean that the program would never make a tactical mistake below ply 6.
>This should be a major advantage over current max ply 2, 3, or 4 exhaustive
>search programs.
>

You seem to misunderstand alpha-beta. Alpha-beta *always* finds the same "best"
move as exhaustive search does at any depth. What it does not tell you is how
much better the "best" move is.



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.