Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Some facts about Deep Thought / Deep Blue

Author: Robert Hyatt

Date: 12:26:49 08/29/01

Go up one level in this thread


On August 29, 2001 at 14:52:31, Joshua Lee wrote:

>On August 29, 2001 at 14:07:20, Robert Hyatt wrote:
>
>>On August 29, 2001 at 13:59:01, Joshua Lee wrote:
>>
>>>>Unfortunately I found only one volunteer to help me to
>>>>analyze the positions that deeper blue pondered and
>>>>I am not going to use more than 20 hours of computer time
>>>>per week to analyze.
>>>>
>>>>Uri
>>>
>>>I would be glad to help as i said before but there is one problem, I know that i
>>>have seen the analysis of different positions in which a commercial will find
>>>the move played however we would have to go through the log files alot closer
>>>than you think as some moves are given in the mainline of others.
>>>For example i posted recently about Deeper Blue playing h5 when it saw this at
>>>11/6 from 3 or 4 moves earlier so this will probably show to require much more
>>>time than we think...........But when you think about the draw missed by
>>>Kasparov this should've come up in the pv from earlier moves but i didn't see
>>>it, It is supposed to be too deep for DB so when micros find this move can they
>>>be picking it for the wrong reasons ? If not then clearly Deep Blue searched
>>>positions differently and better, for example several times a top commercial
>>>will find the correct move in the pv for test sets yet change it's mind.
>>>
>>>If we are going to do this it should be under strict rules agreed apon by people
>>>who think deeper blue is stronger and those that do not. I don't know if
>>>Prof. Hyatt would participate or not but i think if he would this would bring
>>>closeure for the time being ...atleast untill either the DF-Kramnik match and or
>>>DB being ressurected to play weather that be against DF or any other program.
>>
>>
>>I think it is a pointless experiment.  For those that don't want to accept DB
>>for what it was, _nothing_ is going to change their mind.  They will keep
>>finding new excuses as to why some finding is in error.
>>
>>Any program that could produce a 2655 rating over 25 consecutive games to win
>>the Fredkin GM prize, and then have a successor with 25X as many circuits and
>>100X the speed, _must_ be a strong chess player.  There is no way on earth I
>>can see how it could be weaker than today's best programs.  That statement
>>boggles the mind, IMHO.
>
>I agree, but atleast doing this would give sceptics one less way to say DB is
>weaker!
>Ofcourse someone here must have connections to the team so i don't see why they
>haven't tried to convince the DB team to run some public games against Deep
>Fritz??? Also what about the DT code that's out there you don't have the
>hardware but it's in "C" so i don't know why it hasn't been discussed here.
>Just because you don't have the hardware doesn't mean that a glimpse into what
>the machine was thinking can't help.
>
>Or am i missing something.    Thankyou
>
>BTW how about those Cray Blitz-Crafty games already :) Or maybe if you would
>explain how different the pv is between the two and how much ply crafty needed
>to win or draw instead of lose. And ofcourse what kind of hardware Crafty needs
>to compete equally with CB on it's cray.


The problem with cray has _always_ been getting information "back".  IE I
ran the games inside a facility that is very security-conscious.  They greatly
limit what gets in there, and they allow practically nothing back out.  I didn't
give any thought to this because I was simply curious about how the current 1M
NPS crafty would compare against a program with a significantly different search
approach.  I should have tried to have someone up there ship me the output on a
tape or CD, but I didn't think about it.  By the time I went back up there, the
files were long since cleaned out...

I was hoping I might have captured the PGN files if nothing else, but I can't
find anything here although I am not 100% convinced I have searched _everywhere_
yet.

When you have a hundred gigs of stuff sitting around, it is easy to lose a
dozen PGN games. :)



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.