[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&nbsp;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>&nbsp;</DIV>
   <DIV><FONT color=3D#0000ff face=3DArial size=3D2><SPAN=20
   class=3D359254816-10042001>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 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>&nbsp;<FONT =
   color=3D#000000=20
     face=3D"Times New Roman">&nbsp;[ stuff deleteded=20
     ]</FONT>&nbsp;</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?&nbsp;</FONT>&nbsp;<FONT =

     color=3D#0000ff size=3D2><SPAN=20
     class=3D359254816-10042001>&nbsp;</SPAN></FONT></FONT></DIV>
     <DIV><FONT face=3DArial><FONT color=3D#0000ff size=3D2><SPAN=20
     class=3D359254816-10042001>[ stuff deleteded=20
     =
   ]&nbsp;<BR>&nbsp;</SPAN></FONT></FONT></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>

   ------=_NextPart_000_000F_01C0C1F0.1F5C0510--