Computer Chess Club Archives




Subject: Re: Proving something is better

Author: Bruce Moreland

Date: 16:04:28 12/18/02

Go up one level in this thread

On December 18, 2002 at 16:13:59, Omid David Tabibi wrote:

>I conducted self-play matches between std R=2 and std R=3. The results showed
>that std R=2 is superior, and that was enough for me.

If you are throwing other test suite data away because it contradicts your
conclusion, you should not be drawing conclusions from other test suite data.

You have test suite data supporting R=3 over R=2.

You have test suite data supporting VR=3 over R=2.

You have game play data supporting VR=3 over R=2.

You have unpublished game data supporting VR=3 over R=3.

You have to throw something out, so you are willing to throw out the test suite
data for R=3 over R=2 because it doesn't support your conclusion.

It is unclear why you choose to throw out this evidence rather than some other
evidence.  What leads you to believe that this evidence is spurious while the
other is not?

And if the test suite evidence is spurious, why include it in order to support
VR=3 over R=2?  Throwing data out when it contradicts your conclusion and
keeping it when it supports your conclusion doesn't seem proper.

The autoplay games aren't up on the website, by the way.


This page took 0 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.