Author: David Dahlem
Date: 14:29:39 06/15/04
Go up one level in this thread
On June 15, 2004 at 17:16:14, Dann Corbit wrote: >On June 15, 2004 at 17:05:57, David Dahlem wrote: > >>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. :-) > >That's my point. Both comparisons are apples to oranges. Comparison of elapsed time to the finish line over a certain distance between two competitors is like comparing apples and oranges? Then all horse races, vehicle races, etc. are meaningless? 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.