Author: Sune Fischer
Date: 08:29:01 09/06/02
Go up one level in this thread
On September 05, 2002 at 18:35:02, Uri Blass wrote: > >In that case you could use the 2 decimel numbers to claculate better estimate >for the times relative to the published time. > >I wonder what is the reason that it was not done. > >Uri The number of decimals also indicate how sure you are of a number, you don't just measure a number, and then write it with all the decimals you measured, that would in fact be wrong. You have to know how many of the decimals are accurate and how many are 'noise', if you only trust the first decimal, then rounding to that decimal is the right thing to do. When you read 2.0 you should know the 'real' number lies somewhere in the range 2.0 +- 0.05, it is implied. If you want more decimals you need to run more experiments, this could be a problem if for some reason they didn't have enough time on the machine, or the review of the article was done at a later stage etc. -S.
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.