Author: Peter Fendrich
Date: 15:47:14 01/05/00
Go up one level in this thread
On January 05, 2000 at 16:32:12, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On January 05, 2000 at 14:47:11, Chris Carson wrote: > >>In my opinion SSDF does not need more external >>validation (some human games are included in the ratings). > >this is not correct. human ratings were used (IIRC) maybe up to 1993 at >the latest. 7 years washes _all_ the 'humaness' out of the SSDF rating >pool, since they have played thousands of games since the last human game >was included. The human results used are not washed out more today than 1993. The results are still used in the same way with the same impact as then. The ordinary K-constant doesn't apply here. The human results are only used to adjust the level of the list. That doesn't say it is a human list in any way. And there are problems: a) It is far too few games between humans and chess programs. b) Are games played 10 years ago still giving the same information? Probably not, because of the increased knowledge about of how to play computers. I would think that humans are much more prepared for the computer style today than 10 year ago. As a pure program vs program rating list, giving the differences between chess programs, it is very accurate ratings IMO. The adjustment to human levels however are only helping us to get a rough estimate of how to compare these ratings to human ratings. //Peter
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.