Author: Cesar Contreras
Date: 12:07:35 06/21/04
Go up one level in this thread
Hi, thank you responding. >You write that you think that you can make an analogy to IQ tests ... but this >is also wrong. Could you please explain me why i can't make that analogy. >Finally let me inform you without being arrogant that there is no lack of good >test methodology because test theory is a perfect field Yes, but what i mean is about tests oriented to chess programming. Not only test suites, but maybe about tournament decisions (players selection, time selection, number of games) >you miss is a good test suite and the answer is - - - there is no such test >suite because it's a contradiction in itself. You build up a chess engine for >that it could play chess. But chess isn't just puzzle solving. You are right, it's diferent, but a chess engine plays like this: "given a centain position, find the best move you can find (that one that gives you the best score)", witch it's very similar to test solving, the main difference (maybe fundamental) are the samples. What i can undertand it's that the test could needs to be so big that can't be applicated, but it's scientifically proved or is just experience and opinions?
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.