Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: chess computer ratings

Author: Sonja Tiede

Date: 06:56:50 09/24/01

Go up one level in this thread


>>>Against humans, there is no real data.  If you are talking about taking a
>>>program on an XXX megahertz machine, and playing it against a program on
>>>a 2*XXX megahertz machine, then the faster machine will be rated about 60
>>>points higher, using the typical Elo formula.  I don't think that +60 will
>>>be true for games vs humans, however.  It might be 1/2 of that or even less.
>>
>>
>>Take 2 programs, one with 2000 SSDF ELo and one with 2600 SSDF Elo,
>>assume the 2000 value is true against humans.
>>Do you really think the other programm has a human-strength of less than 2300 ,
>>since all SSDF elo-values are based on comp-comp matches ?
>
>
>It is certainly possible.  But more likely, take a 2500 SSDF program and a
>2650 SSDF program and play them against humans, it is likely they will produce
>similar results...

Ok. Your example is true, but in my opinion this (your example 2500&2650) is
a result of a 'tuned' book  and book learning, and not a result of a generall
'lack' in measuring the playing strength only with comp-comp matches.

What i want to say is,
(1) that book learning does improve the comp-comp
'winning rate'  but the overall playingstrength is not going to be improved,
even not in the opening!!!
The convergence-rate of todays book-learning algorithm is _extremly_ slow, and
if you observe a overwhelming 150-50 result with similar comp-comp-opponents
(prg A vs. prg B, prg A book-learning enabled) you are witness of some other
'effects' but you cannot be sure that program A is better.

In generall , when both programs are using book-learner the variance is rising
up , and you need thousands of games to get an result that reflects
the true playing strength.


(2) the book that is shipped originally with a programm is not tuned
to be good in general (in chess theory), it is tuned to play 'succesful' against
the most important competitors

(3) comp-comp matches without the 'lack' of (1)+(2) are to be determined
better been suitable the playing strength than comp-human games, since a
single human would apply point (1).




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.