Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Questions about test suites and rating lists (SSDF independent)

Author: Hans Christian Lykke

Date: 06:31:12 02/16/01

Go up one level in this thread


On February 16, 2001 at 00:34:16, Aaron Tay wrote:

>1) Can someone summarise for me what the main well known test suites are?
>
>Besides WAC that is..I used to recall a webpage that compared this and someone
>help?
>
>2) Given all the complains about the uneven quality of Rating lists, what
>factors would you look for in deciding if a rating list is a quliaty one?
>
>Eg
>
>* Number of games
>* testing procedures [handling of bugs in book learning etc]
>* Quality of testers [Would fewer quality testers be better than lots?]
>* Transparancy [availability of games?, policy statements,audits? ]
>* Perceived indepedence
>* Hardware used
>
>
>any more? And how do the various rating lists either by organisations [SSDF],
>e-zines [e-bit, selective search] or single persons [eg Frank Quisinsky's list]
>compare acording to the citerias?
>
>It seems to me that SSDF seems to be the mostly superior in most areas, altough,
>they need to work on the perceived indepedence part..

I think that SSDF can not be more independent than we are.
Complete independent.

Venlig hilsen
Hans Christian Lykke (SSDF)



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.