Author: Bruce Moreland
Date: 15:23:59 05/25/00
Go up one level in this thread
On May 25, 2000 at 18:19:57, Tom Kerrigan wrote: >On May 25, 2000 at 15:55:03, Ernst A. Heinz wrote: > >>>Sounds to me like you should test this for the same reason >>>that you did the "X <=> X+1" test. >> >>Sounds to me that you still do not accept or understand the >>qualitative difference between the cases ... >> >>=Ernst= > >I'm not even suggesting that the cases are remotely similar. > >I'm simply continuing the point of this thread, namely, you noticed that as >depth increases, the number of draws increases and the number of wins decreases. >Your conclusion is that this behavior is due to unequal depths. But wouldn't it >be interesting if the behavior also occurred with equal depths? > >Here's the problem in my mind: >You didn't believe that "X <=> X+1" would vary with depth, so you did an >experiment and wrote a paper. >You don't believe that "X <=> X" varies with depth, so you are dimissing the >possibility with curt remarks and implications that I don't understand the >problem. > >-Tom I haven't fought with Ernst's gzip + postscript yet, but from reading other posts in this thread it sounds like he did an 8 vs 8. I don't think it is necessary for him to do a 9 vs 9, etc. That'd be like giving your control group different doses of placebo. You shouldn't have to do that. bruce
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.