Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

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

Author: Derrick Daniels

Date: 14:41:13 08/29/01

Go up one level in this thread


On August 29, 2001 at 14:03:49, Robert Hyatt wrote:

>On August 29, 2001 at 13:52:33, Uri Blass wrote:
>
>>On August 29, 2001 at 12:52:15, Roy Eassa wrote:
>>
>>>This sentence DOES say a lot, doesn't it:
>>>
>>>"By the summer of 1990--by which time three of the original Deep Thought team
>>>had joined IBM--Deep Thought had achieved a 50 percent score in 10 games played
>>>under tournament conditions against grandmasters and an 86 percent score in 14
>>>games against international masters."
>>>
>>>That was 7 years before, and many-fold slower hardware (and much weaker
>>>software, no doubt), than what played Kasparov in 1997.
>>
>>No
>>This sentence tells me nothing new.
>>
>>I know that humans at that time did not know how to play against computers like
>>they know today.
>>
>>Today programs got clearly better results than deep thought
>>and there is more than one case when they got >2700 performance inspite of
>>the fact that the opponents could buy the program they played against them
>>something that Deep thought's opponents could not do.
>
>Deep thought produced a rating of 2655 over 25 consecutive games against a
>variety of opponents.  None of them were "inexperienced" in playing against
>computers.  Byrne.  Larson.  Browne.  You-name-it.  That argument doesn't hold
>up under close scrutiny.  In some ways, it appears that the GMs of today are
>prepared far worse than the GMs of 1992 were prepared to play computers.
>
>In 1992 GMs _were_ encountering computers in various tournaments, from the
>World Open, to the US Open, right on down to the state level.  Today computers
>are not playing in any of those...  There were dozens of deep thought games on
>the internet, so the humans had good ideas about the programs strengths and
>weaknesses.



Yes but in 1992 computers were laughed at, they were so weak, it's no comparison
to today's programs and you know it.


>
>DT was just very, very strong.  And DB/DB2 were both _far_ stronger.
>
>
>>
>>Uri



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.