Computer Chess Club Archives




Subject: Re: significant math

Author: Gian-Carlo Pascutto

Date: 13:33:40 11/19/02

Go up one level in this thread

On November 19, 2002 at 16:31:33, Robert Hyatt wrote:

>On November 19, 2002 at 16:24:36, Gian-Carlo Pascutto wrote:
>>On November 19, 2002 at 16:22:14, Russell Reagan wrote:
>>>You can't prove either to be clearly better than the other, but you can give >evidence that they are comparable in terms of performance.
>>You haven't done that. You've shown that they reach similar NPS.
>>NPS =/= performance
>ANd they play similarly when using equal hardware.  Is _that_ also ignorable???

Yes, very easily.

It might be that Yace is actually a lot faster internally but has
more bugs in the evaluation, or that it's evaluation isn't as well
tuned, or that the search isn't as good.

Maybe Crafty is actually a lot faster but (insert same argument here).

...and the net result is that even though there are big speed differences
the programs play similarly.


This page took 0.01 seconds to execute

Last modified: Thu, 07 Jul 11 08:48:38 -0700

Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.