Author: David Dahlem
Date: 14:05:57 06/15/04
Go up one level in this thread
On June 15, 2004 at 16:44:58, Dann Corbit wrote: >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? Well, that's apples and oranges. More valid would be to time you on your bike to the finish line against someone elses time to the finish line. :-) Regards Dave
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.