Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: About head or tail (was Upon scientific truth - the nature of informati

Author: blass uri

Date: 03:34:46 07/16/00

Go up one level in this thread


On July 16, 2000 at 03:34:45, Ed Schröder wrote:

>>posted by Dann Corbit on July 15, 2000 at 20:21:54:
>
>>Simplifying.  I have a penny.
>>I toss it twice.
>>Heads, heads.
>>I toss it twice
>>Heads, heads.
>>I toss it twice
>>Tails, heads.
>>I toss it twice
>>Heads, tails.
>
>>I count them up.
>
>>Heads are stronger than tails.
>
>>My conclusion is faulty.  Why?  Because I did not gather enough data.
>
>Right.
>
>A few months ago Christophe posted some interesting stuff here regarding
>this topic and nobody really was in agreement with him (me included) until
>I did an experiment which worked as an eye opener for me. The story is not
>funny and goes like this...
>
>In Rebel Century's Personalities you have the option [Strength of Play=100]
>The value may vary from 1 to 100 and 100 is (of course) the default value.
>
>Lowering this value will cause Rebel to lower its NPS. This opens the
>possibility to create (100% equal!) engines with as only difference
>they run SLOWER.
>
>I was interested to know HOW MANY games it was needed to show that a 10%
>faster version could beat a 10% slower version and with which numbers. So
>I created  two personalities:
>
>FAST.ENG (default settings) [Strength of Play=100]
>SLOW.ENG (default settings) [Strength of Play=80]
>
>and started to play 600 eng-eng games with Rebel's build-in autoplayer
>with pre-defined fixed opening lines both engines had to play with white
>and black.
>
>The personality with as only change [Strength of Play=80] caused Rebel to
>slow down with exactly 10% on the machine the marathon match took place.
>Note that this value (80) may differ on other PC's in case you want to do
>similar experiments.
>
>Here are the results of the 600 games played between the FAST and SLOW
>personalities. The first 300 games were played on a time control of "5
>seconds average". The second 300 games were played on a time control of
>"10 seconds average".
>
>FAST - SLOW   162.5 - 137.5   [ 0:05 ]
>FAST - SLOW   147.0 - 153.0   [ 0:10 ]
>
>The first match of 300 games at 5-secs looks convincing. A 54.1% score
>because of the 10% more speed seems a value one might expect.

I think that there may be a factor of luck in the choice of the opening.
I think that in order to avoid this problem you can play 150 games with white
and after it play 150 games with black with reversed colours.
I think that in this case the chances of the slow version to win are smaller.

I think that 10% faster is about 8 elo better.
8 elo better suggests a result of 153-147 and simple statisics tells me
that the standard deviation is about 7 points(I am not sure about the
probability f wins and draws so the exact standard devation is not clear).

It means that in 95% of the cases you will get something between 161-139 for the
weaker player and 167-133 for the stronger player so both results are logical
and not surprising.

I believe that playing in reversed colours after half of the game reduce the
standard deviation but I still think that 300 games are not significant even in
this case.

Uri



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.