Author: Christophe Theron
Date: 15:01:57 04/09/02
Go up one level in this thread
On April 09, 2002 at 17:22:49, Dann Corbit wrote: >On April 09, 2002 at 17:14:55, Ricardo Gibert wrote: >[snip] >>This explains "the rating drift" perfectly. >> >>The first few years, the ratings remains about the same, then suddenly about 100 >>rating points disappear in the year 2000. Most of DC's examples follow the same >>pattern. >> >>I think DC will be disappointed that his "discovery" is not going to exactly >>rank right up there with the theory of continental drift ;) > >Actually, it is very nice to understand why. However, it is very puzzling that >the ratings do not move at all then, since much stronger programs are introduced >over time. My only explanation can be that the ratings are not recalibrated for >the whole set. The older ratings must be "cast in stone" somehow. Dann, before this goes on and on, please note that the SSDF has reduced ALL ratings by 100 points when they published one of their list in 2001. I do not remember at what time exactly they have done this adjustement. It is AFTER January 2001 and BEFORE August 2001, that's all I can say with the data I have here. I hope somebody else will give the exact date. This has been done because they wanted the head of the list to be recalibrated to fit the latest humans-computers results, which is discutable because of the effect it has on the lowest rated computers. But I find your list interesting. Can you please revert the effect of the adjustement (by adding 100 to all new ratings) and publish your list again? I suspect you have written some script to do this. Thanks. Christophe
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.