Author: ShaktiFire
Date: 16:24:29 07/15/00
Go up one level in this thread
On July 15, 2000 at 18:32:52, Mogens Larsen wrote: >On July 15, 2000 at 18:22:59, Ralf Elvsén wrote: > >>These are pretty harsh words, especially since I think Uri has a point. >>Even if it is not correct I wouldn't call it "nonsense" or "truth distortion". >>These judgements should be saved for more clear cases, and there has >>certainly been some on this board in the past... > >No, he doesn't have a point, since you can't determine GM strength by gathering >the results of several programs, reach GM strength within the bounds of >uncertainty and then conclude that one of the programs are GM strength. Because >you already know that none of programs alone are of GM strength with certainty >due to a large ELO uncertainty, otherwise it wouldn't be necessary to add them >together. So nonsense is the appropriate word, even though truth distortion was >unnecessary harsh. > >Best wishes... >Mogens That is an interesting point. I wonder, do you know the elo formulation enough to say the uncertainty. For example, Deep Jr. will achieve a TPR based on playing a 9 game tournament. Now if we consider the TPR an estimate of the real elo rating, what is the uncertainty using only 9 games. How many games required to achieve say a 90% chance of having an elo rating within + - 25 pts. of the TPR?
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.