Author: Amir Ban
Date: 00:24:24 01/23/00
Go up one level in this thread
On January 22, 2000 at 19:31:06, walter irvin wrote: >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 >?????? > I don't know. Set up the match and let's see. Amir
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.