Author: Tom Kerrigan
Date: 12:20:16 05/26/00
Go up one level in this thread
On May 26, 2000 at 14:11:13, Ernst A. Heinz wrote: >Hi Tom, > >>Here's my explanation for the misunderstanding. You've run an experiment that's >>a little weird, because one side searches a ply deeper than the other side. Then >>you draw conclusions from the experimental data. It's easy to get confused and >>think, "Ernst says that the percentage of draws increases _because_ one side is >>searching slightly deeper than the other side." But if that's not what you're >>trying to say, then I'm all good with it. > >Now I am really disappointed because your explanation above >indicates that you have not really read my paper nor any other >publications about diminishing returns and computer chess >self-play. :-( No, of course I haven't read your paper. Do you realize how painful it is to read Postscript files on Windows computers? Ghostscript makes documents look like they were traced in crayon by monkeys. > >Otherwise, I do not know how you would come to your statements >about what I allegedly say and that an "X+1 <=> X" experiment >is "a little weird". > >=Ernst= I call it a little weird because it has a property not found in most matches, not because I don't understand it or because I haven't seen it before. -Tom
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.