Author: Vincent Diepeveen
Date: 13:32:49 12/24/99
Go up one level in this thread
On December 24, 1999 at 15:53:49, blass uri wrote: >On December 23, 1999 at 19:24:48, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: ><snipped> >>Bob i've got proof of bad working of singular extensions. > >I think it is possible that they had a rule of not extending >wasting tempo moves so deep thought could not see when that 18.Rg1 is >losing when it played 16.c4 because black waste tempo in the line Qh4-h3 Rg1 >Qxh2+. > >It is also possible that they did not extend this line because they did not >extend lines that give the queen for a pawn. > >You need to see 14 plies from the move 16.c4 without extensions to find >22...Qxh5# Don't forget check extensions in qsearch and exending on check, apart from that singular extensions. That all rips plies from it. apart from that you don't need to see all lines to already not play c4. If evaluation of Deep Blue I was really that bad, then it still should see all this tactical. If it didn't , then obviously its fullwidth search with singular extensions and some other crap didn't work for this obvious position. It clearly refutes the idea that singular extensions solve the game. I see it very simple. A professional hardware designer makes a special chip called deep thought, deep blue, deep blue II. An incredible achievement on its own. Then he's inventing singular extensions. Though all commercial programmers who dedicate fulltime to their program and many other researchers can't get it to work, or make it work in such a way that it only gives them sometimes in tacitcal position 1 or 2 ply more, this hardware designer, can? And apart from this claim that it's seeing the right plies, but then it falls into an easy joke? I'll put now evaluation off from DIEP (not smart in itself, but i'll just let it do material) and see how many plies after c4 it sees serious trouble, besides seeing whether it plans c4 at all. >I do not think that the reason of not seeing this tactics was singular >extensions because I believe that with singular extensions and some check >extensions it is possible to see that 16.c4 is bad. > >Uri
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.