Author: walter irvin
Date: 16:31:06 01/22/00
Go up one level in this thread
On January 21, 2000 at 17:28:08, Amir Ban wrote: >On January 21, 2000 at 10:50:16, Albert Silver wrote: > >>On January 21, 2000 at 09:51:26, Tom Kerrigan wrote: >> >>>On January 21, 2000 at 09:33:22, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>>>I don't think there is any doubt. But it will likely be at _least_ another >>>>10 years and probably longer. >>> >>>You said earlier that the DB team discovered glaring holes in the evaluation >>>functions of PC programs. Glaring enough that a seriously retarded version of DB >>>could still whomp on them. >>> >>>So my question is, why doesn't FHH make a PC program with this ueber-function? >>>It wouldn't be much work for him, and the cost is zero. Okay, it would run >>>significantly slower in software than it does in hardware, but if the function >>>is THAT much better, it would still be a win. He could throw in null move and >>>probably achieve partiy. >>> >>>I think this is a real no-brainer, and the only reason he hasn't done it already >>>is possibly because the evaluation function isn't all that it's cracked up to >>>be. >>> >>>-Tom >> >>It could also be that the 'patches' for the eval function would be to taxing on >>a PC system. How expensive would certain things like the x-ray effect of pieces >>be? You know, lining up a rook-rook-queen battery behind pieces and pawns for >>devastating effect, or pawn-bishop-queen. I once proposed this to a programmer, >>suggesting values for who controlled a square through this battery effect (even >>though the piece at the end would be quite a distance from the controlled >>square). The idea was to speed up certain tactics this way, and the positional >>understanding of the program on who had better square/space control. When I was >>told this was too costly, I realized that systems that had super hardware >>offered possibilities one could only dream of with PCs. I have no doubt that DB >>probably had MANY such dreams implemented. >> > >If they did they would show up in DB and DBjr games, and made a difference. If >they didn't show up in the games, then they must not have been very important. > >Amir do you believe that junior 6 at 48 hrs per move plays better chess than deep blue at 3 mins a move ?????????? if deep blue played junior on a athlon 1ghz a 24 game match ,WOULD JUNIOR 6 GET WIPED OUT 24-0 OR WOULD IT BE CLOSER ?????????????? if junior 6 was run on a computer that made it search 200,000,000 nps would a program such as fritz 6 on a 500 mhz pc have a chance to win a match ?????? > > >> Albert Silver
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.