Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 07:32:34 10/16/99
Go up one level in this thread
On October 16, 1999 at 08:51:12, Eelco de Groot wrote: > >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 you hit the nail on the head. good thinking. :)
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.