Author: Eelco de Groot
Date: 05:51:12 10/16/99
Go up one level in this thread
On October 16, 1999 at 08:27:03, Jeremiah Penery wrote: >On October 15, 1999 at 23:21:29, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On October 15, 1999 at 18:29:28, Eelco de Groot wrote: >> >>>Finally some real news on this! Thanks Scott! Is it really true that the >>>original chip didn't use extensions at all in the last 4 ply search, where the >>>chips were used, does anybody know? I read something like that in a Dutch post >>>by Vincent on the semi official CSVN mailinglist. >>> >>>Regards,Eelco >> >> >>The chess chip didn't do 'singular extensions'. I have not seen anything >>about whether it used in check extensions or anything else. Had I done the >>chip I probably would have not done _any_ extensions in the hardware for >>reasons that are a bit complex to get into here unless someone wants to >>discuss the issue in more detail. > > >I would be interested in hearing about it (provided it isn't _too_ technical :). > >Jeremiah I would also be very interested, Robert, Jeremiah, even if I can't follow more than 10% of it! I suppose it would be something like that in a parallel process you can organize the subprocesses better if they all have more or less the same response time? And with extensions there would have to be a way to cut them off maybe, if the process is taking to long, so that would mean that the coordinating program would have to be able to interrupt the chips? But it seems that Mr. Hsu now would want to incorporate extensions and Null Move. Of course now there is probably only going to be one chip, not many as in Deep Blue. Regards,Eelco
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.