Author: Maurizio De Leo
Date: 05:42:55 02/21/03
Go up one level in this thread
>>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. I had studied the topic before. And I have taken enough classes with maximum mark in statistics to understand what we are talking about. Yes, errors are always possible, but I seriously doubt to have made a "TERRIBLE" one. >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. Ok, so for you "Shredder" is a false answer also to the question "who is SSDF number one" ? I don't agree. Let me make an example : 1) Take the result of a Round-Robin Tournament, be it a human or computer one 2) Put them inside elostat You will have a list like the SSDF one, likely with high confidence intervals, and likely it won't be possible to deduce from there who is the best. Neverthless, noone would question who was first in the tournament. >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. I understand the meaning of the deviation. There is no way to decide with 95% certainity wich program is best, but there is a way to separate the three programs : TPR, or PERFORMANCE RATING. Shredder performed slightly better than the other programs and it is at the moment the number one. It isn't for sure the best (although it may be), but it is the number one. I would be really astonished if someone couldn't get this. Think about the Fide list. It is generated with about the same number of games per player as the ssdf list, so the confidence intervals should be similar, although the calculation is slightly different. Anyway, I rember that some time ago Adams and Topalov were separated by just ONE point. So it was clearly impossible to guess who was better without making it a coin toss. BUT none ever contested that Adams was number 4 and Topalov number 5. It just derived from the results and from the calculations. ************************************* Who is first in a competition is something that we can always say for sure, except when there are ex-aqueo for a not small enough measurement unit (which is not the case in SSDF). Who is best is something that we can assert with some confidence probability, confidence probabilty that raises the more the gap between the first and the second is. ************************************* >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. I was searching throughly for any personal attack in my letters and I really have to say that I didn't found any. I was on the contrary pleased that you seemed wanting a calm discussion, and I will hope that this desire is still firm in you mind. I never beated my grandmother which is unfortunately dead long ago. I don't find nice to cite other people relatives, but I'm not easy to be upset, so no problems. Maurizio
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.