Author: Dann Corbit
Date: 17:52:09 05/26/04
Go up one level in this thread
On May 26, 2004 at 19:49:16, Uri Blass wrote: >On May 26, 2004 at 19:34:48, Dann Corbit wrote: > >>On May 26, 2004 at 17:55:25, Uri Blass wrote: >>[snip] >>>people do not expect programs to perform normally in game in 1 second but they >>>expect programs to perform normally in game in 1 minute. >>> >>>bullet is 1 minute per game and not 1 second per game. >> >>Then they have a bad expectation. Every program makes horrible moves on a slow >>machine at game in one minute. > >It is clear that they make better moves at slower time control but I do not >agree that they make horrible moves. Look at these games: ftp://cap.connx.com/pub/The%20Gauntlet/calibration/quick/ >>Even if the machine is fast, most programs will make awful blunders from time to >>time at that time control. >> >>The programs that do not crash or even the programs that do not lose on time >>overage will still make really bad choices. > >These bad choices are better than the choices of most humans. At G/1 the choices are probably better. But looking over the games, you will see moves that you will never make in any casual game. >>I submit that on a 300 MHz machine, there is no program anywhere that plays well >>at G/1 >> >>At any rate, the slower the machine and the faster the time control, the more >>silly and absurd the output. >> >>But you already knew that, of course. > >If a top program has rating 2600 for 120/40 and if 1 minute/game is equivalent >to less than 256 times faster and if doubling the speed gives 70 elo then >the estimated rating of the program at 1 minute per game is more than >2600-70*8=2040 at 120/40. At G/1, the game bares little resemblance to what I call "chess"
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.