Author: Roger
Date: 23:59:25 01/30/00
Go up one level in this thread
On January 30, 2000 at 13:36:38, Hans Christian Lykke wrote: > >The first new program during 2000 is Amir Bans and Shay Bushinskys >Junior 6.0 K6-2 450 MHz. Junior 6.0 immediately took the first place >with 2706 after 403 tournament games! This is 77 points more than >Junior 5.0 has on the same hardware! It's fascinating that it >still is possible to increase the playing strength of chess >programs, measured in the way SSDF does. > >Compared to Chess Tiger 12.0 Junior 6.0 has 24 more points. Part >of this difference has been gained due to Chess Tigers tendency >to repeatedly lose against Junior 6.0 in the same opening. >Hopefully the opening books and the learners will be improved >in the future so that these phenomenon disappears. > >The order of the programs on K6-2 has changed somewhat on this >list, thanks to the fact that more games have been played. Chess >Tiger 12.0 has lost 14 points, Fritz 5.32 12 points, Nimzo 99 >17 points and Hiarcs 7.32 has 12 points less than on the latest >list. Junior 5.0 has increased it's rating with 10 points. > >The average rating gain between P200 MMX and K6-2 450 MHz is >now 79 points. This is based on 1537 games with the four programs >which have been tested on both hardwares. > >Next official list will be made in March. > >Thoralf Karlsson 1. Wouldn't Tiger repeatedly lose to ALL the other programs, not just Junior? There are quite a few games versus Nimzo and Fritz on the 200 megahertz machnines there, too. Is it observed with them? 2. Interestingly, the results show that Junior 5 whomps Tiger more than Junior 6, 33 to 9 (j5) versus 24.5-17.5 (J6). What is it about J5 versus Tiger that creates this finding? Obviously it's not tuning, since J5 predates Tiger by a lot. 3. I assume the column just to the right of the rating gives the width of a 95% confidence interval... If so, then Junior and Tiger are in a statistical dead heat. I know it is a linguistic convention to say that the program with the highest rating is in first place, but conventions aside, mathematically there is no "first place" here, but only a shared number one: The math is the math (and this is nothing against Junior. I own Junior 5 and I like its style a lot better than Fritz 6.0 or Hiarcs 7.32). There is just no #1 here (unless you want to argue that a smaller confidence interval might be better). In this list there are two number 9's, and then an eleven, which strongly implies that the ratings are more reliable than they really are. Roger
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.