Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: But, Re: Questions re P4 3.03 with HT ??

Author: Robert Hyatt

Date: 19:51:59 12/10/02

Go up one level in this thread


On December 10, 2002 at 22:09:48, Jeremiah Penery wrote:

>On December 10, 2002 at 21:17:04, Robert Hyatt wrote:
>
>>On December 10, 2002 at 20:37:37, Jeremiah Penery wrote:
>>
>>>On December 10, 2002 at 20:15:15, Robert Hyatt wrote:
>>>
>>>>On December 10, 2002 at 13:25:55, Jeremiah Penery wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>I'm not trying to prove anything.  But for you to say Vincent is hand-waving is
>>>>>a bit much, since he's actually referring to some real data.  This is 6
>>>>>positions worth of data, when all the tests you did the other day were only
>>>>>using 5 positions.  So you claim one test is meaningless, and the other isn't?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Several positions, run _several_ times, and averaged together to smooth out
>>>>the variation...
>>>>
>>>>Big difference...
>>>
>>>http://www.talkchess.com/forums/1/message.html?269805
>>>
>>>You ran 4 positions.  Nowhere did you say that you ran them multiple times or
>>>that the NPS figures are averaged at all.
>>
>>I _always_ run them multiple times.  I have stated this dozens of times here.
>>And I have given the reasons why I do this...  _many_ times...
>
>The text in your message implies that you ran them once, and there's absolutely
>nothing there to indicate multiple runs.  Just because you usually, even always,
>do something, doesn't mean it should automatically be assumed that you did, when
>the implication is the opposite.
>

There is _no_ "implication" in my post of any kind that I can see.

If you look at my discussions about parallel search and testing for the
N years I have been posting here, I have _always_ mentioned the necessity of
running a test multiple times, and I have even posted raw data showing how
much variability there is in a parallel search using the same position, and
just running it over and over.

I'd _hope_ that it is not necessary to continually re-state the obvious,
over and over, every time I post _additional_ parallel search data.  I
_always_ run tests multiple times and average the results.  I have a simple
shell script that does this automatically so that I just type the command
and check back in a few minutes to see the average of the results...


>Even still, the fact that you ran only 4 positions, and yet complain about the
>data Vincent is using, that uses 6 positions, is pretty silly, no matter how
>many times you ran your positions.


When vincent doesn't even _run_ the tests?  and I am "pretty silly"?

Just call me "silly boy" then...  if that is your opinion...

Several post one set of results.  One person posts another.  And _that_
post is the "bible"???

Not in my world...




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.