Author: Amir Ban
Date: 23:51:55 01/22/00
Go up one level in this thread
On January 23, 2000 at 01:19:04, Bruce Moreland wrote: >On January 22, 2000 at 17:47:28, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>They were searching about 100K nodes per second, according to Hsu. yes, they >>do a lot more in their eval than what they could do if they ran on a PC and >>searched 100K nodes per second (this match was in 1995-96 time frame, which >>would have been roughly pentium pro 200 level machines for the PC side). But >>regardless... if they searched only 100K, and they dominated the commercial >>programs as they have been reporting (again, 38-2 was reported) that says that >>whatever they are doing is pretty good... as programs like fritz are way over >>100K on a P6/200... > >I think that those matches should be absolutely ignored because they weren't >played under controlled conditions, and they weren't played in public. > >There are enough places that mistakes could have been made, and enough estimates >that could be off, that for these data to be accepted upon faith is completely >ridiculous. > >The machine has existed for some time, and has had ample opportunity to display >its talents on the internet and in international tournaments. However, we have >zero published games between a "full strength" DB Jr and any other program. > >For all I know it is a wonderful machine. However, if anyone wants me to accept >that it is a wonderful machine, it is going to have to come out and play some >games, the idea that it should play all of its computer vs computer games behind >locked doors and that we should simply accept the results is just bullshit. > >Sorry. > >bruce The results can be disregarded on these grounds of course, but it's also true that the results, as reported, can be dismissed as being in contradiction to the DB/DT public record, and to common sense in general. Amir
This page took 0.03 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.