[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: computer-go: Computer Go hardware
Hi Mark,
You say the strongest programs of today are only marginally stronger.
I'm not in a good position to know if this is true or not, but can you
(or someone) try to quantify this a little better? I'm interested in
a rough compilation of the following information, even if it's a
guess:
1. What do you mean by only mariginally? In a 100 game match
with no handicap, would todays very best program have
a good chance of losing to the best 10 year old program on 10 year
old hardware? What would be the "expected" score?
2. If I had a competitive program 10 years ago, then I would
not have to maintain it, it would still be competive today
even with that old 10 year old computer. Is this true or false?
3. Does the hardware make any difference? Will the newest and
best programs play equally well on ANY old machine, say a 486
class machine (with no extra time allowance of course)?
This is an important point, because if the answer is YES, hardware
makes a difference, and there has been no improvement, then the
only difference in todays software is that it takes a more powerful
computer to play just as well, a kind of negative progress.
In other messages from this group, I have been told that the
programmers have adjusted their algorithms as hardware has improved.
This directly implies that it's possible to take advantage, if even a
little, of additional computing power. And if the improvement has
only been marginal, then it almost seems like all the improvments
(what little there has been) is all based on extra computing power.
We could actually do the test, I'm sure someone has hardware that
represents a PC from 1991 and an old program.
Don
From: "Mark Boon" <tesuji@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2001 18:57:42 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300
Importance: Normal
Sender: owner-computer-go@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: computer-go@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="----=_NextPart_000_000F_01C0C1F0.1F5C0510"
Content-Length: 4208
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
------=_NextPart_000_000F_01C0C1F0.1F5C0510
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
My 2 cents worth: the strongest programs of today are only marginally
stronger than they were 10 years ago, when computers were 100 times slower
than they are today. So I think it's fair to say the efficiency index value
would actually be (significantly) lower than 0.01. So your value 0.7 is
quite a wild guess indeed. If I would have to make a wild guess, I'd rather
put it in the 0.001 to 0.0001 range. And since the programs don't get
stronger with more processing power (not yet, anyway), the index is
subjective to getting halved about every 18 months.
Mark
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-computer-go@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:owner-computer-go@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Compgo123@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Saturday, March 31, 2001 7:23 PM
To: computer-go@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: computer-go: Computer Go hardware
[ stuff deleteded ]
We may define a concept, calling it the 'logic
efficiency index'. For a best possible program, the index value is 1. I'll
make a wild quess here. Today's best program has an index value about 0.7.
A
related question is, for Go, what's the relation between the index value
and
the amount of programming?
[ stuff deleteded ]
------=_NextPart_000_000F_01C0C1F0.1F5C0510
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content=3D"text/html; charset=3Dwindows-1252" =
http-equiv=3DContent-Type>
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.00.2314.1000" name=3DGENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV><FONT color=3D#0000ff face=3DArial size=3D2><SPAN =
class=3D359254816-10042001>My 2=20
cents worth: the strongest programs of today are only marginally =
stronger than=20
they were 10 years ago, when computers were 100 times slower than they =
are=20
today. So I think it's fair to say the efficiency index value would =
actually be (significantly) lower than 0.01. So your value 0.7 is quite =
a wild=20
guess indeed. If I would have to make a wild guess, I'd rather put it in =
the=20
0.001 to 0.0001 range. And since the programs don't get stronger with =
more=20
processing power (not yet, anyway), the index is subjective to getting =
halved=20
about every 18 months.</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=3D#0000ff face=3DArial size=3D2><SPAN=20
class=3D359254816-10042001></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=3D#0000ff face=3DArial size=3D2><SPAN=20
class=3D359254816-10042001> Mark</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE=20
style=3D"BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-LEFT: =
5px">
<DIV class=3DOutlookMessageHeader><FONT face=3D"Times New Roman"><FONT =
size=3D2>-----Original Message-----<BR><B>From:</B>=20
owner-computer-go@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx=20
[mailto:owner-computer-go@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]<B>On Behalf Of</B>=20
Compgo123@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<BR><B>Sent:</B> Saturday, March 31, 2001 7:23=20
PM<BR><B>To:</B> computer-go@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<BR><B>Subject:</B> =
computer-go:=20
Computer Go hardware<BR><FONT color=3D#0000ff></FONT><FONT =
size=3D2><FONT=20
face=3DArial><SPAN class=3D359254816-10042001> <FONT =
color=3D#000000=20
face=3D"Times New Roman"> [ stuff deleteded=20
]</FONT> </SPAN><BR></FONT></FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV></FONT><FONT face=3DArial><FONT size=3D2>We may define a concept, =
calling it=20
the 'logic <BR>efficiency index'. For a best possible program, the =
index value=20
is 1. I'll <BR>make a wild quess here. Today's best program has an =
index value=20
about 0.7. A <BR>related question is, for Go, what's the relation =
between the=20
index value and <BR>the amount of programming? </FONT> <FONT =
color=3D#0000ff size=3D2><SPAN=20
class=3D359254816-10042001> </SPAN></FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial><FONT color=3D#0000ff size=3D2><SPAN=20
class=3D359254816-10042001>[ stuff deleteded=20
=
] <BR> </SPAN></FONT></FONT></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>
------=_NextPart_000_000F_01C0C1F0.1F5C0510--