Author: Vincent Diepeveen
Date: 04:49:10 08/21/02
Go up one level in this thread
On August 20, 2002 at 20:27:18, martin fierz wrote: In these days all programs were so bad that games were decided by who didn't give away most pieces *usually*. So in that respect all games from then are biased as the level of *every* participant was 600 points lower than they are now. >this kind of test is fundamentally flawed by being 100% biased: you are >presenting a selection of positions where deep blue failed, in every single one. >of course, if a program of today solves a single one of these, be it by luck or >by better knowledge, it already looks good. >there are surely lots of positions where deep blue would look good in comparison >to a micro, but they are not included. > >for any meaningful comparison, you should get a set of test positions and run DB >and your micros over it. of course you can't do that now. but if you can't make >a meaningful comparison, the next best thing is to make none at all. not to make >a meaningless comparison :-) > >aloha > martin
This page took 0.01 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.