Author: Torstein Hall
Date: 07:42:34 05/26/02
Go up one level in this thread
On May 26, 2002 at 07:49:26, Rolf Tueschen wrote: >On May 26, 2002 at 05:09:33, Torstein Hall wrote: > >>>Another point: if you took a look at the list where Shredder was leading you >>>could see that the leading programs had played their games against totally >>>different opponents. So you can't compare the ratings at all. >> >>If you can not do that then I think you can forget about rating. I'm playing >>different players based on rating and of course often we have not played the >>same persons. That is one of the reasons we have rating! > >This is absurd. I assist Martin Schubert that _testing_ could not allow >deliberately chosen opponents. We are talking about rankings in test series, >_not_ in real life tournaments. > > >> >>>My suggestion: the top programms should play the same opponents to make it >>>possible to compare their results. >>>If I remember right it happens quite often that a program is very strong in the >>>first rating list it appears in (where it plays against weak opponents). In the >>>next rating list where it has to fight the tough ones it falls back in the >>>rating list. >> >>That is what the error margins are for. I think the rating normally stays within >>this limits. So for a given program that has got a SSDF rating of say 2600 +/- >>43 You can say with 95% (if I remember right) confidence that the program has a >>rating within the range 2557 - 2643 > >This is absolutely false. THe error margins have _nothing_ in principal to do >with different opponents (on different hardware actually)! The margins are >simply a consequence of the statistical maths. > >Rolf Tueschen Who are you arguing with? The absurd thins is that I never has sayed what you say is absurd!!!! I was just reading what the numbers meen! And that is we can tell a rating with 95% confidence inside this margins! But another thing Martin did say was that we can not use the numbers when we have played different players. I disaggree strongly to that, as long as we are talking about the same pool of players. If it was not for that, rating numbers would be utterly useless. (And maybee they are....... :-D ) Torstein > > >> >>Torstein >>> >>>Regards, Martin
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.