Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Best testsuite (sure it's not WAC)

Author: Albert Silver

Date: 16:41:33 06/07/01

Go up one level in this thread


On June 07, 2001 at 17:10:52, Robert Hyatt wrote:

>On June 07, 2001 at 16:27:20, Albert Silver wrote:
>
>>On June 07, 2001 at 13:14:32, Robert Hyatt wrote:
>>
>>>On June 07, 2001 at 12:33:44, Bruce Moreland wrote:
>>>
>>>>On June 07, 2001 at 10:52:33, Robert Hyatt wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On June 07, 2001 at 06:41:44, Gian-Carlo Pascutto wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>On June 07, 2001 at 05:52:51, Jouni Uski wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Yes I know all test suites are almost useless to finds the best playing chess
>>>>>>>software. But still, which suite is the less bad in your opinion? If You can
>>>>>>>only use one test suite before starting real games, which suite will you select?
>>>>>>>Is it still LCT II?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Following Bruce Moreland's recommendations, I'd have to name ECM.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>--
>>>>>>GCP
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>I don't like ECM as it has _way_ too many errors.  The "modified" version
>>>>>might be reasonable.
>>>>
>>>>I don't see why the errors matter.  So I fail on those, big deal.  If I run WAC,
>>>>I get the same number every time.  If I run ECM with more time, I'll find more
>>>>solutions.  To me this means that if I make the program better, I'll find more
>>>>of them, which is what the suite is supposed to show.  The suite has 879
>>>>positions.  I think that well over 700 of them can be found, although I don't
>>>>have an exact number.
>>>>
>>>>bruce
>>>
>>>
>>>I don't like getting "better" and then getting more wrong answers.  Or getting
>>>worse and getting more "right" answers.  The ones that are wrong are really
>>>wrong.  And it is certainly possible to make your program stronger and suddenly
>>>start getting the wrong answers rather than the right ones.
>>>
>>>IE it is like grading a test with a key that randomly gets changed without
>>>your knowing...
>>>
>>>I thought that was the reason we spent so much time going over the thing and
>>>excluding obviously bad positions?
>>
>>Just out of curiousity, how long do the longest (and correct) solutions take?
>>
>
>
>I'm not sure what you are asking.  There are some that don't get solved by
>today's programs, so they are the "longest" if they are correct.  I generally
>run it at 10-30 seconds per position as there are so many of them.

That was my question in fact. I haven't seen the ECM so I wondered whether it
was like WAC where most of the solutions are found relatively quickly. What's
the proportion of solution times like? I could run it as Bruce suggested, but
really it's just to get an idea.

                                    Albert

                                        Albert



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.