Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 14:57:09 05/05/04
Go up one level in this thread
On May 05, 2004 at 16:32:13, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: >On May 05, 2004 at 12:42:24, James Swafford wrote: > >Why don't you get a member of ICGA/ICCA and look for yourself? > >Hyatt should learn to work with objective speedup numbers instead of >denying that a 30 position test at his own quad is insignificant. Why don't _you_ look. There is no such paper. One word comes to mind... "liar". You know there is no such paper or else you would have already cited it specifically to get out of this stinkhole you have dug for yourself. But you _continue_ to lie and suggest that such a paper exists as in the above suggestion implying that if he looked he would find it. Again... "liar" Prove me wrong. > > > >>On May 05, 2004 at 07:53:14, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: >> >>>On May 04, 2004 at 11:49:49, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>> >>>>I asked for a specific citation for "the JICCA paper" you claimed I wrote and >>>>gave the speedup = 1 + (NCPUS -1) * .7; formula, and also where I claimed it was >>>>good for _any number_ of cpus. >>>> >>>>I know that (a) I didn't write any paper on the Crafty algorithm yet; (b) that >>> >>>YOU DENY THAT YOU WROTE A PAPER PUBLISHED IN ICGA/ICCA ABOUT CRAFTY WHERE YOU >>>CLAIM A 1 + 0.7 (N-1) SPEEDUP? >>> >>>>I have _always_ said that my formula is an approximation that works with up to 8 >>>>processors. >>> >>>it says N for N processors and some posts from you a few years ago indicated it >>>also worked for N=16. >>> >>>>Anything beyond that is your imagination.. >>>>Time to admit it. >>> >>>It has been proven not to be working for n=4 even. >>> >>>>The CCC search engine is available for you to hunt for posts where I claimed >>>>that after you verify there was no JICCA paper whatsoever. >>>>I've called you a liar. >>>>Disprove it or run as you always do... >>> >>>You publish an OFFICIAL paper in the journal of icga and now you claim you >>>didn't write it. It's time to use some of the posts you do here to proof to your >>>government you deny your own papers (about crafty) and commit fraud (in the dts >>>paper) as a professor. >>> >> >> >>Wow Vincent. I think you could've retracted your statement up until >>now... seems you've put yourself in a tight spot. >> >>Why don't you cool off a bit, retract that statement (or prove it?), >>and we can all move on. >> >>-- >>James >> >> >> >>>>You like to use the "fraud" word. I think it is _obvious_ who is the "fraud" >>>>here... Of course you can prove your statement and make me out the fraud again. >>>> >>>>Your move. Clock is ticking.
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.