Author: Uri Blass
Date: 16:29:40 09/29/03
Go up one level in this thread
On September 29, 2003 at 18:50:07, Jeroen van Dorp wrote: >On September 29, 2003 at 16:22:06, Drexel,Michael wrote: > > >>What are you talking about? > >You are writing your question directly under the answer. I repeat it for your >convenience. You cannot prove that an engine finding the right move for the >wrong reason is the strongest engine. > >You stated yourself that it's quite possible that an engine changes the PV and >evaluation after a longer time. Anyone with experience with test results knows >this is not a "statistical" or "hypothetical" question, but a very valid >situation that often occurs. > >That's why you were given the advice to repeat the suite with the full time, and >see it for yourself. He already explained his reason not to do it in the following words "You can not manually test 400 positions for each engine in reasonable time." I guess that he tried to do the best test in limited time and he gets some good estimate for the strongest engine in similiar positions. Uri
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.