Author: Sandro Necchi
Date: 14:18:33 06/14/04
Go up one level in this thread
On June 14, 2004 at 16:44:51, Steve Glanzfeld wrote: >On June 14, 2004 at 16:33:19, Rolf Tueschen wrote: > >>Here is a quote from 2001 when WM Test already had 40 positions. At that time >>CSS the journal wrote: >> >>"Die ermittelte CSS-Elo-Zahl eines Programms darf man als Indikator seiner >>Spielstärke betrachten ..." >> >> >>In English: >> >>The calculated CSS-Elo_Number of a program can be viewed as an indicator of its >>strength... >> >>This was in journal number 5 of 2001. >> >>QED The now new claim that it was all about fun and nothing but fun is false. >>The CSS journal itself defined the context of Elo number and calculated Strength >>of a program. Hi, Rolf is correct this time. > >I guess I have to brush up my knowledge of some computerchess basics :) but I do >not quite understand all this. When a test measures the ability of chess >programs to find good moves, why is it remarkable then when this is seen as an >indicator of strength? It is not remarkable; it is quite probably wrong. Look this simple answer and think about: 1. a !! move is not 100% a sure win; it only give better winning chances most of the time. 2. a ! move gives only equality or a small edge in most cases. 3. 2 ? moves are good enough to lose! 4. a ?? moves is most of the time a loosing move. So we can conclude that: 1. to be able to find the best moves in many positions not necessarely makes the program stronger. 2. To make several mistakes or weak moves does make the program weaker! >What else should it indicate, when a chess program has a >good result in such a test? My answer is very little! > >Btw. thanks for the links. Looks like a giant collection of testing data. I >don't know most of the program names :) > >Steve Sandro
This page took 0.01 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.