Author: Uri Blass
Date: 21:53:54 10/18/05
Go up one level in this thread
On October 18, 2005 at 22:07:38, chandler yergin wrote: >On October 17, 2005 at 21:07:38, Uri Blass wrote: > >>On October 17, 2005 at 20:58:19, Ryan B. wrote: >> >>>On October 17, 2005 at 10:10:58, Uri Blass wrote: >>> >>>>I am now surprised by the big drop in the CEGT rating of my Fruit personality. >>>> >>>>It was already 2806 after 92 games and now it is 2748 after 223 games. >>>> >>>>I also remember possible error of 61 elo after 92 games but even if the real >>>>rating is 61 elo lower than 2806 then I still do not expect the rating to change >>>>so fast. >>>> >>>>This is surprising also because results that I read earlier not by CEGT >>>>supported my personality. >>>> >>>>I wonder if the real error is not higher than the error that is written >>>> >>>>I wonder what is the reason for the big drop and if there was no problem in the >>>>matches against spike and Jonny that seem to be the main reason for the drop in >>>>my personality(did the same tester play these matches?). >>>> >>>>possible source of mistakes in the results. >>>> >>>>1)testing in different hardware relative to previous fruit. >>>> >>>>The claim of the CEGT is that they test with hardware that is equivalent to 2 >>>>ghz PIV but the problem is that there is no equivalence and it is possible that >>>>one program likes more one processor and not another processor. >>>> >>>>2)testing different positions and not the same positions that were tested by >>>>earlier version. >>>> >>>>3)testing against different opponents. >>>> >>>>Uri >>> >>> >>>I could have told you that setting the history to 50 was not going to maintain a >>>higher rating than keeping it at 70. >> >>You could not know it and we still do not have enough games to know that 50 is >>weaker than 70. >> >> Sure it may help in analyzing some >>>positions but in game situations how often does it really help? About 5% - 10% >>>of games at most? >> >>5-10% is significant. >> >> A little bit extra depth helps in every game Fruit plays >> >>Not correct. >> >>this little extra depth seems to be less than 0.5 ply based on test positions >>and I am sure that there are games that it changes nothing. >> >> so >>>it makes sense to sacrifice some level of error for extra search depth. >> >> >>By this logic it make sense also to increase the history threshold from 70 to >>higher value because it is good to sacrifice speed for extra depth. > >I don't think you can do that. Speed means extra depth. >That's the whole point of using dual Processors. I meant in my post to sacrifice some level of error for extra search depth. Of course increasing history threshold does not sacrifice speed for extra depth and I did a mistake when I wrote speed. I meant to copy what the poster posted to show that by his logic there is a simple way to increase Fruit's rating but unfortunately I trusted my memory instead of using copy and paste and I did not copy it correctly(for some reason I wrote speed instead of some level of error). Uri
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.