Author: stuart taylor
Date: 10:55:31 10/26/00
Go up one level in this thread
On October 26, 2000 at 10:16:22, Sven Reichard wrote: >>> 1. All the new top programs. >>>2.Their previous versions. >>>3.Preferably, their previous last TWO versions, in fact, (but at least the >>>previous). >>>4.All play all, either 8 or 16 games x3 (each for 5 minute, 30 minute and >>>tournament timed cycles). >>>5. If 8 games x3 each-each program would have one Q-pawn opening, one K-pawn >>>opening one books off opening! and one Fisherandom, both as white and black >>>which is 8 games. >>>6.Or twice that.(the "books-off" can be started off once with d4 and once with >>>e4. And the books on, can be "directed" a little to come to games of two >>>different natures for each of the two d4 or e4 games. >>>7.Whether the 8 or 16 game all play all arrangements are made, it should be 3 >>>times that much. Once for 5 mins. Once for 30 mins. And once for 40 in 120 Mins. >>>games=altogether 24 or 48 games for each program all play all. >>>8.All on equal hardware. > >Assume we have 10 programs, each with their two most recent versions. This gives >a total of 190 pairs. A set of three games (one at each time control) takes >approximately 10min + 1h + 6h (worst case assumed), or let's say, 7h altogether. >So we get a total of (190 matches)x(4 openings)x(7 hours) = 5320 hours. If >somewhere I could find 7 CPU months to spare, I might organize such a >tournament. > >Seriously, if you want to do this in a distributed manner, I might contribute. >Sven. I agree it's a lot of time/rescources. In a distributed manner would also be good, if it can't be in an all out, spectator-rich, and supervised competition. But I unfortunately, am not in a position to oversee such a project. But how about someone who does these things anyway? And isn't it an interesting plan? S.Taylor
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.