Author: Sune Fischer
Date: 15:41:02 01/20/03
Go up one level in this thread
On January 20, 2003 at 18:34:21, Dann Corbit wrote: >On January 20, 2003 at 18:08:45, Sune Fischer wrote: > >>On January 20, 2003 at 17:27:44, Dann Corbit wrote: >> >>>>>No contest can truly tell us which program is strongest. Not even a trillion >>>>>rounds of round-robin. >>>>I disagree again. I believe a trillion rounds will show which program is >>>>strongest. >>> >>>You're wrong. >>> >> >>No he is right. >>There is a saying in statistics (IIRC correctly) "null events don't happen". >> >>Basicly it means things that are very very improbable are impossible. >> >>You would never see TSCP beat Fritz more than 50% of the time if you did a >>trillion games. No one has done more than a trillion games yet, we all know >>fritz is stronger, why is that? ;) > >Until the number of games reaches infinity, there will always be uncertainty. > >Because there is some degree of randomness in the programs, I'm not even sure >that there *is* an answer to the question: >"Which is stronger, Chess Tiger or Fritz?" > >For programs with hundreds of ELO difference, you can be fairly certain >relatively quickly. For programs of about the same strength, you will never >know the answer. But what you were saying was, that you could _never ever_ know the answer. There is a fundamental difference I think and this is where the null event theorem saves us. It _is_ possible to make an accurate statement if you have reduced it to a null event. After 1 trillion games I think we have a clear winner, whom ever that may be. -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.