Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: If 75 Games are not considered a Statistical proof, neither is the SSDF.

Author: Bruce Moreland

Date: 16:29:55 01/31/01

Go up one level in this thread


On January 31, 2001 at 15:37:21, Dann Corbit wrote:

>On January 31, 2001 at 14:17:48, Bruce Moreland wrote:
>[snip]
>>If you start a match and get 10-0 right away, it proves that p is bigger, by any
>>reasonable standard of proof.
>
>And yet the SSDF has had matches start out that way which went to the other
>opponent in the end (or something fairly close to that -- I forget the exact
>figures for an O-fer reversal).
>
>With chess, the odds of 0/10 for evenly matched chess engines is harder to
>figure, but with a coin toss it is easy:
>
>1/(2^10){all heads} + 1/(2^10){all tails} = 1/(2^9) = .2%
>
>Hence, if you had one thousand people flip ten pennies, (on average) two of them
>would get either all heads or all tails.  The question is -- are you one of
>those people when you run an experiment?
>
>Improbable events do happen.  That's why we buy fire insurance.
>;-)

You will have improbable cases occur.  That is why they are called improbable
and not impossible.

I don't know why people have a hard time dealing with this issue.  Every match
result has associated with it a probability that the result could be achieved by
two equal programs, purely by chance.

If you get a result, and declare that the winner of the match is the better of
the two programs, there is a chance that you will be wrong.

If you play more games it is not guaranteed that this chance is reduced.

What I can't understand is why people look at a 10-0 result and say, "That is
due to chance!", and look at a 60-40 result and say, "One of the programs is
better!", when the probability that the second result is due to chance is
greater than the probability that the first result is due to chance.

A bogus 40-60 result is more probable than a bogus 0-10 result, unless your test
setup has a rock in it.

This is a case where I am arguing with people who think that their common sense
must be accurate, and that due to this, the world is flat.  The world is not
flat, and it is possible to prove it.

bruce



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.