Author: Russell Reagan
Date: 18:14:57 08/21/04
Go up one level in this thread
On August 21, 2004 at 12:18:15, Sune Fischer wrote: >What you're saying here is basicly that Crafty has a working set that is much >larger than 3 MB... You are not understanding what Bob is saying. He is not saying that Tom's conclusion is wrong. He is saying that Tom's experiment does not *prove* Tom's claim. Tom's conclusion may be correct. Tom's experiment may *support* his conclusion. However, it doesn't *prove* his conclusion to be correct. To illistrate the difference, here is an example. I'll make a claim. "On my computer, TSCP runs at 331Knps and Fritz runs at 1002Knps. Therefore Fritz will win a match against TSCP." Now Bob will reply, "Your experiment does not support your conclusion." He is not saying that my conclusion is wrong. In fact he will probably agree that my conclusion is correct, but his opinion would be based on other experiments which have been repeated many times, not the data which I presented above.
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.