Author: Chris Carson
Date: 13:24:06 01/06/00
Go up one level in this thread
On January 06, 2000 at 15:34:32, Dann Corbit wrote: >On January 06, 2000 at 14:57:47, Chris Carson wrote: > >>Ref: Monty Newborn >> >>I think his book (How computers play chess) has this table: >> >>ELO PLY >>1600 5 >>1800 6 >>2000 7 >>2200 8 >>2400 9 >>2600 10 >>2800 11 >> >>Thus: 200 points per ply. I think he also says the average >>number of moves per ply is 36-38, so machine speed must increase >>by a factor of 6 to reach the next ply. If someone has the book >>handy, check my table. I will double check tonight. > >I think plies is probably the most important measure of strength. However, it >is a serious mistake to imagine that n-ply == n-ply for two different programs. > >One program uses null-move, and the other does not. Big difference at the same >ply depth (but it probably takes much longer to get to a given ply for the non >null-mover). Suppose that two programs both reach 11 ply. But the second >program has extrapolated to 30 plies using some check extensions and things like >that for some special lines. Same ply depth, but one has a clear advantage. > >Even what "one ply" means varies from program to program in nomenclature. > >Finally, some plies are easy and some are hard. Suppose, in a difficult pawn >endgame with each side having two pawns and a king, you have a long pawn race on >your hands. A human can easily see what will happen in ten moves at a glance. >That's 20 plies! It will take the computer much longer to see that far. I agree. Best Regards, Chris Carson
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.