Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 14:29:38 01/23/00
Go up one level in this thread
On January 23, 2000 at 15:19:14, Tom Kerrigan wrote: >On January 23, 2000 at 14:57:16, Jeremiah Penery wrote: > >>How fast does CS-Tal run on a fast machine? Less than 20k NPS, I think. DB is >>supposed to have a bunch more evaluation, which would probably make it a bunch >>slower. > >No, the only reason you think DB has a bunch more evaluation is because Hyatt >keeps saying that it does. But none of us has any proof that DB has more >evaluation than CS Tal. And Hsu doesn't even think it has more evaluation, >because his estimate translates to at least 20k NPS. > >>>I don't see why a terrific evaluation function would be right at one depth and >>>wrong at another. >>If you write an evaluation with a 5-ply search in mind, what will you do >>differently than if you have a 14 ply search with tons of extensions in mind? >>Will you really put the same knowledge with the same weights in? > >But the point is that DB's evaluation is terrific. In fact, it's so terrific >that DB running at 100k NPS can stomp all over micros. So you're right, the >evaluation function may be tuned for a 14 ply search, but it's reportedly >wonderful enough that depth doesn't make a big difference. > >-Tom reread the abstract to the IEEE micro article. First sentence I believe. "the most complex eval of any program..." I believe Hsu believes that. Since he wrote it. I know some of the things they did. I don't know of anyone else doing some of them, based on watching programs play... Not much else to go on of course... except their results, which no one has yet reproduced either...
This page took 0.02 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.