Author: Dann Corbit
Date: 13:44:58 06/15/04
Go up one level in this thread
On June 15, 2004 at 16:00:08, David Dahlem wrote: >On June 15, 2004 at 15:54:23, Gian-Carlo Pascutto wrote: > >>On June 15, 2004 at 15:33:41, David Dahlem wrote: >> >>>One of the problems with the current method of testing engines with test suites >>>(e.g. WM-Test) is the problem of proving that the proposed solution move is >>>actually the best move, especially with positions of a positional nature. >>>Perhaps a new method would avoid this problem, namely a suite of mate positions, >>>with known, more easily proven solutions? Time to solution could be the criteria >>>by which engines are evaluated. >>> >>>Just an idea. Any thoughts? Would this work? >> >>As long as the idea is to test matefinder speeds this is fine. >> >>Don't expect to get an indication to playing strength though. >> >>-- >>GCP > >Well, this was just an idea, an unproven theory, but i would think some kind of >formula could be developed, and i would also think stronger engines would score >higher than weaker engines. :-) Probably they would. But what is the relationship? For instance, if I ride ten miles on my bike at 20 MPH, and I jog 5 miles down a trail at 10 MPH, what is the conversion for benefit between the two forms of exercise?
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.