Author: Steve Glanzfeld
Date: 05:43:58 06/15/04
Go up one level in this thread
On June 15, 2004 at 08:01:03, Bryan Hofmann wrote: >I give you a prime example as to why this just does not work. A while back I ran >Tao 5.6 through several EPD tests using different seetings to see which one got >the best results. I then ran a few other engines through the same set of tests >with there default settings; > > > > ECM-GCP IQ2 BK Aemis Aemis2 MATS Totals >Tao 5.6 147 175 17 66 46 13 464 >Aristartch 4.41 116 163 16 63 51 11 420 > >Looking at the above results you would say the Tao is stronger then Aristarch >and this is not the case as Tao would only win 35% of the games against >Aristartch. I guess these tests didn't cover all elements of chess strength. Maybe Tao is the faster tactician, but Aristartch is better in the endgame or positionally? Nevertheless, when the strength difference between two programs is BIG (bigger than in you example probably), then the stronger program will also be tactially faster in most of the cases. When the two programs compared have a similar strength, then it is much more likely that the faster tactician is not the one which is stronger in general (as long as the other program meets a certain speed requirement which is necessary to avoid blunders). Steve
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.