Author: Jeroen van Dorp
Date: 15:50:07 09/29/03
Go up one level in this thread
On September 29, 2003 at 16:22:06, Drexel,Michael wrote: >What are you talking about? You are writing your question directly under the answer. I repeat it for your convenience. You cannot prove that an engine finding the right move for the wrong reason is the strongest engine. You stated yourself that it's quite possible that an engine changes the PV and evaluation after a longer time. Anyone with experience with test results knows this is not a "statistical" or "hypothetical" question, but a very valid situation that often occurs. That's why you were given the advice to repeat the suite with the full time, and see it for yourself. >In most of the cases an engine finds the right move for the right reason. >This is just a question of probability. >There are cases when it finds the right move for the wrong reason, but that is >true for all the other programs as well. And so how do they compare to each other? After all that is what you were trying to assess. You were making a comparison between engines, and chose one engine from the batch: <quote> Q: Why? A: to get an idea which programs are best suitable for interactive Analysis. </quote> The method you use is not a proper method. If that remark bothers you, it doesn't mean the people mentioning it are wrong and you are right. It simply bothers you. In that case it would be better not to make the claims you have made, to avoid irritation. >How often do I have to repeat it? >It is not important for me whether the PV is wrong or not or whether it discards >the move or not later on and never returns again. There's a bell ringing somewhere that you wanted "to get an idea which programs are best suitable for interactive Analysis". If the PV is wrong the analysis is wrong. Now you claim that it's not relevant if the PV is wrong or right. Yet you claim to test for finding the best engine determining the right PV in the shortest time. >Yes >Eventually I do exactly the same during interactive Analysis. Then your interactive analysis is wrong also. But that doesn't matter. We're talking about methods here, not your notion of practical useability. If you feel "some move and PV returned from the engine with some evaluation" is sufficient for you, that is _no_ problem. It's _your_ choice. However the method you use constinues to stay not the right one for answering your original question. >It is my task to find the right move with the correct assessment. You're welcome. As long as you're aware that you started this thread with a statement about finding out which _engine_ was the best for that, and with the results you presented you stated that the _test suite_ gave you the answer to your question. It was not about your task finding a move with the correct assessment with your own brain. If you have found the engine that caters you, that's okay. It doesn't mean your test method is valid. If that bothers you, simply don't publish the test results. J.
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.