Author: Thorsten Czub
Date: 01:57:57 09/10/02
Go up one level in this thread
On September 09, 2002 at 19:59:39, martin fierz wrote: >i ask because i wonder if you are wasting your time with the following approach: >if you produce 50 versions of rebel (let's imagine they are all same strong) they are not as strong. remember that rebel XP default is NOT playing good against fritz. so you change something. and than you play games to find out if the change is helping. you number the styles. so that you can identify the style and the games. and >then play a short (e.g. 10 games) match against fritz with each of the 50 >versions - what happens? thanks to statistical fluctuations *alone*, some >versions of rebel will win, some will lose. you must find out which versions are better than others. "thanks to the statistical fluctuation" you want to say that everything is random ? but the world is not working the way you decribe it. there is variation. there is fluctuation. but not that much that man cannot handle. or how do you manage your life ? you create a god. you call that god not jesus or allah or buddha or sungod, but you call it statistical fluctuation. and you want to suggest to us that ONLY your god knows and decides. but this is a very limited point of view. this world is ours too. we live in it. and we can change it. to better- and to weaker. we are not outside the world and gods direct our moves. you will think you produce a great >new playing style, when all you do is chase random numbers... if you believe in this theory, than this is YOUR point of view. i do believe in control things. and thats the way i work. beeing creative, changing things, and believing that it works. and i can prove it by playing games. how many games do >you play with every style? i don't want to stop you from trying to improve rebel >- just to make sure you do it right :-) how do you know what is right ? When is a song right ? when the artist believes it ? is there a rule for doing it right? when is a chess program ready ? you have a strange way of thinking about things. >let me give you an example: when i change something at my checkers engine, i >play matches of 288 games against a control program for comparison. i have often >seen the first 20 games be like +4 for one engine, but finally it loses the >match... > >aloha > martin and ? do you really believe that your 288 (or do 400) games X vs. Y do REALLY show you what is going on ? believe me, if you test X vs. Y, you will find out nothing. if you test a chess engine, or style, you have to concentrate on games against ALL, test-suites, watching the games, finding out patterns. setup test-positions that HAVE this pattern in, ... a test of a program uses ALL kind of ways. not only ONE. >PS: this "try lots of ideas and one will be good" strategy is something you can >actually make money with on the stock market: an arbitrary example: use an >M-N-strategy to make money at the stock market: at the end of every year, buy >stock of companies which are between rank M and N in performance over the last >year, eg M=4, N=10. the idea is to not buy companies with the best performance >because they probably won't be able to repeat their performance, according to >some stock market gurus. now, take 50 such strategies with different M and N >numbers and look backward which would have performed best over the last 10 >years. you are virtually *guaranteed* to find one which outperforms the market. >now, the important money-making step: DO NOT USE THIS STRATEGY YOURSELF. it >won't work, because it's just a random fluctuation thing. one of these >strategies had to be best. instead, sell books on how to make money at the stock >market, quoting this strategy and saying "over the last 10 years, you would have >outperformed the market by 5%". this seems to work well :-) you believe in a world of random. thats your god. i do not believe in a world that is lead by random. i do believe that subjects can change the objects and vice versa. i do believe that there is no difference in fact between subjects and objects. and therefore the one thing is connected to the other. believe in your god. i have mine.
This page took 0.02 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.