Author: Terry McCracken
Date: 05:13:40 11/07/03
Go up one level in this thread
On November 07, 2003 at 06:47:52, Sune Fischer wrote: >On November 06, 2003 at 22:35:53, Terry McCracken wrote: > >>On November 06, 2003 at 21:59:45, Steve Maughan wrote: >> >>>Terry, >>> >>>>>The results of test and matches are not opinions but facts. >>>> >>>>Yes, but the results are not scientific proof that Shredder 7.04 is in fact >>>>stronger than any engine in the top ten! The difference is too small. >>> >>>At the 95% level Shredder is clearly better. According to the SSDF it leads >>>Junior 8 by 28 ELO, having played 781 games. This difference is *NOT* too small >>>- at least not at the 95% level. The error margin is +28 / -26. Of course it >>>is invalid to add the error margins of Junior 8 and Shredder 7 because you'd be >>>effectively increasing the confidence levels above 95%. Of course you could >>>argue that 95% is not a high enough probability and you'd prefer 99.9999% - but >>>then you're heading down the road of computer chess narcissism - an ideology >>>that seems to be in favor here!?! >>> >>>Regards, >>> >>>Steve >> >> >>Total nonsense! > >Which part didn't you understand? > >-S. Sune your asking the wrong question, as this statistical analysis really means very little. I'm annoyed so much _faith_ can be attributed to such such small numbers as proof of Shredder 7.04s strength. What would be interesting is the quality of the games, and how much book influence contributed to the wins as well. It could be with a very small change in parameters that Fritz 8 would be sitting at top spot. Of course there is some chance at work here as well. I thought my point would be understood. I guess not.. Terry
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.