Author: Joachim Rang
Date: 09:26:33 09/13/02
Go up one level in this thread
On September 13, 2002 at 10:54:27, Rolf Tueschen wrote: >On September 13, 2002 at 10:39:48, Joachim Rang wrote: > >>I disagree: >> >>If you got a result 52-48 you can't say, which engine is better, but if you got >>a result 5200-4800 you can at least with 99% probability say, that program A >>performs better against program B (which doesn't mean, that program A performs >>better than B against other programs). > ><smile> > >And you were sure that A is "better" than B? > >But I went too far. I ask you: Are you _sure_ that for CC and the many variables >uncontrolled you know then the better performance with 99%? > >Prove it. But please not just by reading in the tables in Books on Statistics. >Also elaborate why you are allowed to make use of the specific tables. You made >the necessary checks? You have all variables under control? (etc.) > >Rolf Tueschen whats your point? I'm not sure, but I can assume with 99% probability that program A performs better against program B. And if I test program A against all other programs N, with similiar results I can assume with 99% probability that program A is _better_ than the other programs. Maybe I'm wrong and it's only 95% probability or maybe only 90 %, but in either case I got a high probability. Well, I can't prove that, but what are the indications that one can't assume whis this probabilities?
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.