Author: Dann Corbit
Date: 22:44:38 04/30/04
Go up one level in this thread
On May 01, 2004 at 01:07:33, Chessfun wrote: >On May 01, 2004 at 00:58:02, Uri Blass wrote: > >>On April 30, 2004 at 22:44:40, Chessfun wrote: >> >>> >>>Diep is now in the #3 programs >>>http://www.talkchess.com/forums/1/message.html?362447 >>> >>>And Falcon is a Grandmaster strength program about 2700 ELO. >>> >>>And assuming "Shredder 8 is the only engine that consistently scores above 50% >>>against Falcon in my tests" >>>http://www.talkchess.com/forums/1/message.html?362348 we can therefore assume >>>it's #2 >>> >>>That leaves Shredder 8 at #1. >>> >>>Lucky both the #2 and #3 program are neither for sale or available else some may >>>even report they are #1 ;-) >>> >>>I would suggest to both programmers that they get a good team of beta testers >>>and start posting game scores and results that would be deemed realistic. >>> >>>Sarah. >> >>At least in the case of Falcon the programmer did not claim that it is one of >>the top 3 engines. > >No never claimed that ;-) simply claimed "Shredder 8 is the only engine that >consistently scores above 50% against Falcon in my tests" > >>He used the Fritz8's book for Falcon in his tests and he even did not claim that >>in these conditions Falcon is better than Fritz or Junior. > >Re-read the above. > >>Shredder 8 is the only engine that consistently scores above 50% does not mean >>that Deep Fritz8 or Junior8 cannot do it but only that they did not do it in all >>of his tests. > >I think thats a matter of interpretation and I don't read that into it. There seems to be an implicit assumption that he is testing against other professional engines besides Shredder 8. Has he actually said that? Perhaps "the others" are Crafty, AnMon, and things of that nature. If that is the case, then the result would not be at all surprising. I saw Omid David add 250 Elo to Genesis in a matter of a couple weeks. Also, by not scoring better than 50%, what exactly is being measured? Is it test suite output? Is it blitz games w/o book? I don't think we really even know what is being measured. Without a clear statement of: The exact hardware used The exact software used The software parameters used (time control, hash, etc.) The exact nature of the tests (EPD suites, games with ponder on Dual CPU...) The exact conditions of the test (gui used, manual or auto played, etc.) any attempt at interpretation of the data we do not see is far-fetched at best.
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.