Author: Len Eisner
Date: 22:19:36 01/27/00
Go up one level in this thread
On January 28, 2000 at 01:00:17, Dann Corbit wrote: >On January 28, 2000 at 00:41:49, Len Eisner wrote: >[snip] >>Let’s do a little thought experiment. Imagine a program that could search deep >>enough to solve the game of chess. I know it’s not possible today, but just >>imagine it. Now, if the deepest possible search solves the game, how can there >>be diminishing returns for increased search depth? > >Because after a bit over 5000 plies, no additional plies have any value. There >is a limit to the maximum possible moves in a chess game. > >Hence, there is *some* point beyond which additional plies have no value. >That's because there aren't any I guess my point is this: if you believe a program can solve the game by searching deep enough, the ELO curve will not totally flatten out until the program finds a forced win. After that, it doesn’t matter. Len
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.