Author: James Thompson
Date: 06:29:29 07/28/00
Go up one level in this thread
>>> Fritz 6 H7.32 >>> Scores at 10 games : 2.5 7.5 >>> " 20 " : 10.0 10.0 >>> " 50 " : 26.5 23.5 >>> " 100 " : 52.0 48.0 >>> " 150 " : 79.5 70.5 >>> " 200 " : 105.5 94.5 >>> " 250 " : 130.5 119.5 >>> " 306 " : 158.0 148.0 >> >> I would like to comment from the scores that it proves that at a 20 game match >>it doesn't mean anything! Between 50 and 100 games the score for Fritz moves up only slightly from a +3 to +4 points in its favor. But at 150 games the score >>climbs considerably to a +9 point advantage over Hiarcs7.32. Then it starts >>tapering off between the 200 and 250 games with a point advantage of +11 for >>Fritz 6 and then drops to a +10 point advantage at 306 games. So, for two - >>engines that are close to the same strength it shows that you need 50 to 100 >>games, and if the engines are "extremly" close in strength it would be wise to >>play anywhere from 150 to 200 games! I understand that you need a large enough sample to get a fair assessment of the strength of one machine versus another but I'm having a problem interpretinng the results as presented. Each game is independent of the previous game, thus you are sampling a population "with replacement". If that's the case the margin of wins wouldn't flip would it? UNLESS something else affected the results, e.g. the openings played or the color each machine played. Naturally I'm assuming "engine parameters" are held constant from game to game. Assuming this is correct wouldn't it be possible and a more accurate assessment to determine that one engine is stronger when playing a particluar color or a particular line(s)? Has anyone done that kink of analysis? James
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.