Author: blass uri
Date: 14:43:47 07/15/00
Go up one level in this thread
On July 15, 2000 at 17:33:54, Mogens Larsen wrote: >On July 15, 2000 at 17:20:18, blass uri wrote: > >>If you have many programs that have performance of more than 2500 you can be >>sure that the best of them has more than 2500 rating. > >No, you can't, because the result of each program isn't statistically sound. By >gathering good and slightly worse programs you diminish the uncertainty >artificially, so that is incorrect. You can. You cannot say about one of them that it has more than 2500 but you can say that the best of them is better than 2500(You do not know which one of them is the best because you have not enough information) > >>You will never get identical setup of software and hardware in the near future >>so by your logic you cannot claim that programs are GM level in the near future. > >Since there's diminishing returns from hardware advancement, why not make the >computer used at Dortmund standard. The Junior defeats could most likely not >have been avoided by better hardware anyway. I believe that the loss against kramnik could be avoided by 100 times faster hardware. I believe that Junior can avoid Kh8 against kramnik with better hardware. Uri
This page took 0.01 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.