Author: Dann Corbit
Date: 13:40:00 06/12/01
Go up one level in this thread
On June 12, 2001 at 15:53:20, Uri Blass wrote: [snip] >>I disagree here. I would have guessed 50-70 ELO increase, and within the bounds >>of uncertainty, the actual result was *well* within expectations. > >No >1)I think that people expect more than 50-70 elo increase from better hardware. Within the bounds of certainty, the increase could easily be more than 100 ELO. Did you examine the error bars for one standard deviation? >Let see the increase from better hardware from the same engine: > >Junior5 2432,2534(102 elo increase) >Hiarcs7.32 2473,2525(52 elo increase) >Fritz5,32 2478,2551(73 elo increase) >Mchesspro8 2390,2477(87 elo increase) >Nimzo99 2446,2489(43 elo increase) > >You can see that the average increase is 71 that is slightly more than 50-70 > >2)People expect better engine so they expect more than 80 elo increase > >3)if the average expectation is above what you get it is a disappointment. >The disappointment can be explained by a statistical error but it does not >change the fact that it is a disappointment. > >Programmers who fail to win a tournament are not going to say: >"I am not disappointed because it is only a statistical error" I will.
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.