Re: [computer-go] Using floating point sounds very strange to me

[David G Doshay <ddoshay@xxxxxxx>]

On 7, Jan 2005, at 1:46 AM, chrilly wrote:

> In a chess programm 3 things are importan: Speed, speed and speed. In 
> a go
> programm things are obviously different.
Perhaps the big difference is the maturity of Chess programs v.s that 
of Go
programs. The literature on what has been tried and what has worked 
likely
results in the top chess programs having more in common than the present
top Go programs, so a few percent difference in speed shows more 
distinctly
in the chess programs. Right now Go programs are using a very wide 
variety
of algorithms and evaluation functions, and those details seem more 
important
than speed right now.

> But if this is really the case, one can not explain SlugGo. SlugGo uses
> additional computing power in a rather primitive and inefficient way.
Inefficient if what you think you need is all CPUs cranking full speed 
all the
time. Rather efficient if what you would rather have is a CPU on demand
for each new line of play. This is a matter of perspective and desired 
goal.
I chose to investigate what could be done if I could call up a CPU at 
will
and know that that CPU was not doing anything else. It is a different 
view
of efficiency, but the reasons are based upon wanting a specific 
efficiency.

> Nevertheless it plays according the published results considerable 
> stronger.
> If speed does not really count, than SlugGo should not play stronger, 
> or if
> SlugGo plays stronger, Speed counts and one should not use - at least 
> not on
> the x86 - floating point.
I do not follow your line of thought here, particularly the jump back 
to floating
point considerations. I would like to understand what you are thinking 
...


Thanks,
David


_______________________________________________
computer-go mailing list
computer-go@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/