Author: Jan-Frode Myklebust
Date: 12:16:28 04/22/98
Go up one level in this thread
On April 22, 1998 at 13:57:15, Djordje Vidanovic wrote: >On April 22, 1998 at 13:01:35, Bruce Moreland wrote: > >>Points Score >>0 50% >>100 60% >>200 75% >>300 85% >> >>I've rounded these a little, but they're within a percent or so. >> >>So, if you think DB is 300 points better than micro program X, you'd >>think it would score at least +8 -1 =1 or +7 -0 =3. >> >>bruce > >DB may beat the best micro by 8.5-1.5, or even, 9-1, or, 10-0, but this >does NOT mean that its results against humans will be just as good, and >300 rating points better. I'd venture to say that its hypothetical >results vs humans should not exceed the best micro's results by more >than 100-150 rating points. Thus, we talk of two different things -- DB >may exploit a micro (or chess software)'s weaknesses quite consistently, >but this does not apply to humans who are always prone to mistakes, >errors, etc. Thus, another 'guestimate': DB (approximately) 2700, best >micro (computer software) on a Pentium II / AMD K6 400 Mhz 2550-2600. > >Regards, >Djordje And a micro might learn that Deep Blue doesn't learn, and play the same game over and over, getting GREAT results against it.. What a stupid computer, needs human tuning before each match :) Jan-Frode
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.