Author: Rolf Tueschen
Date: 04:03:58 02/21/03
Go up one level in this thread
On February 21, 2003 at 06:43:20, Maurizio De Leo wrote: >Rolf, it seems that for one time you are using topics instead of personal >attacks, so I will answer you. You had better studied the question before. So although you made a big effort you missed the point and you made a terrible mistake. Since Uri made the same I can clarify. You are wrong if you seperate two different questions. Who is the best and who is actually number one. This is NOT the reason for my critic. In fact the given result of SSDF is false no matter for what question you give it. You simply did not understand the meaning of the deviation. Let me say it this way. You have no certainty for what you want ABOVE the possible statement that actually three progs are in the SAME top place. There is NO way to seperate the three progs, no matter how many questions you create. Thanks anyway for the personal attack in an absolutely calm topic. When did you beat your grandmother for the last time this week? You can answer me via email if it's not good in public to talk about such crimes. Rolf Tueschen > >I agree with your point : there must be a "measurement unit". In races that is >0.01 seconds, in ski it is 0.001 sec. > >In SSDF that is **** 1 SSDF point ***** > >The program EloStat calculates rating which are integer number, even if real >rating based on the result should have been 2713.56 or 2689.22 > >I don't know if it has happened in the past, but I'm pretty sure that if 2 >programs finish in the list with the exactly same score, the SSDF would put them >"ex-aequeo", as it's done when at the olympiad two athletes have the exact same >time till to the measurement unit. > >So, see the SSDF like a competition : who arrives first, even for a millisecond >or for a point, wins. > > >A COMPLETELY different things is to decide "who is the best". > >Not always who wins olympiad is the best. For example the best could have had a >little stomacache during the run, or in his lane the wind was blowing a tad more >fast against him or so on. >Of course if someone wins a lot of competitions, you can say : "I'm xx percent >sure that he is the best" > >Same apply for the SSDF. Shrederr has "won the race", doesn't matter if it had a >1 or 100 points advantage. It is so the SSDF number 1. > >For who is the best......it all depends on your preferred confidence range. If >you use the 95% standard the best is "one of the first 5 programs". > >But you can also change the confidence range, and this will shrink or enlarge >the intervals. So you can easily say "I'm 20% or 25% sure that Shredder is the >best" > >Of course if you want certainity you can also never have a leader. For 99% >certainity the intervals will become around +-50 points while for 100% all you >can say is "one of the contestant is the best" :-) > > >So, bottom line is that Shredder is "SSDF number 1". It won the contest. For >which is the best program, you should rely on an educated guess. > > >Maurizio
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.