Author: Bertil Eklund
Date: 05:21:18 01/07/00
Go up one level in this thread
On January 06, 2000 at 17:07:01, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On January 06, 2000 at 10:20:15, Graham Laight wrote: > >>On January 06, 2000 at 10:12:53, Robert Hyatt wrote: >> >>>I don't dismiss it out of hand. But if I have a question about the >>>effectiveness of brain surgery, I ask the _surgeon_ and not the _patient_. >>>They have two entirely different perspectives. The patient recovers fully. >>>He considers this procedure a revolution. The doctor knows that only one of >>>20 will recover. He considers it terribly risky. Who is right? >>> >>>Chess program 'users' have one perspective from playing the programs. The >>>authors have a completely different one, knowing all the things that are >>>missing, all the things the program does poorly, all the things it gets >>>into trouble with... >>> >>>Which perspective seems most accurate? The user of a black box, or the person >>>that 'filled' the black box? >> >>Or the impartial evaluator of the black box? > > >That is the point. You can _not_ evaluate the black box. You can only evaluate >the results. The brain surgery worked. You consider it wonderful. Only the >doctor knows all the difficulties he had during the surgery, how close he came >to losing the patient, etc. Because the doctor sees _inside_ the black box. > >That is why 'impartial evaluation' is not easy until we simply have a lot of GM >games to go on. At present we don't. My view from inside the black box shows >thousands of problem areas that need work. It may be that my view is wrong, if >and only if the black box can produce results against GM players that I don't >expect. The easy way out of this is to wait. We are getting data. We know for >sure that Rebel isn't going to have a 2700 TPR based on games so far, so the >2700 number for Tiger on the SSDF is grossly overinflated. As Ed said, and as I >have said many times, I would consider a TPR of 2500 a remarkable result. And >that isn't good enough to make a GM. Over and over again, this is not TPR it´s MPR, what are you going to do repeat this 500 times and it´s true. Ok this seems to work here on a lot of persons but it´s two different things. Bertil
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.