Author: Thorsten Czub
Date: 17:10:46 05/04/98
Go up one level in this thread
On May 01, 1998 at 13:58:29, Don Dailey wrote: >One very important factor is book learning and I do not know how this >is handled by the raters, hopefully it is handled correctly. The >issue is that if I have a program that learns from it's mistakes >(which I think is a very good thing,) then that program should never >be "reset" by the testing procedure. As an example, if I was a biased >tester, I could simply reset the learning mechanism frequently and >affect the results (perhaps) significantly. I might move the program >from machine to machine or whatever it takes to defeat the learning >mechanism. If Fritz5 gets only ONE machine (since it needs special autoplayer, special hash-ram and big HD (copying the 550 MByte book ...) it has advantages. Hiarcs and Rebel and Mchess can be installed almost anywhere. And so this implies they would get many testers and many machines. >Having several testers testing the same program on different machines >creates the same problem. Right. > I argue that the more computers you use to >test a program on, the more of a handicap you give to that program if >it utilizes learning mechanisms. I don't know the magnitude of the >error but it certainly would be a factor to consider. The only >solution I am aware of is to use the same machine to test the program >on. If you use other machines you must consider them separate >identities.
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.