Author: Rolf Tueschen
Date: 03:47:16 06/23/04
Go up one level in this thread
On June 23, 2004 at 05:50:48, Tony Werten wrote: >On June 22, 2004 at 18:01:37, Rolf Tueschen wrote: > >>On June 22, 2004 at 17:53:10, Franz Hagra wrote: >> >>>>For using this test suite “WM-Test” and to avoid >>>>misunderstandings/misinterpretations of my test results I recommend to look at >>>>the attached “readme.txt”. >>> >>>Only missing point is a little about the significancy of the figures! >>> >>>Hagra >> >> >>I think that they think that the support from CSS is significance enough. This >>is the same with the false public relations by ChessBase when they quote SSDF >>results and rankings as if that had any specific value. This is here in the same >>tradition. Hoax, nothing but hoax. >> >>If now someone feels unhappy let me explain that test results without >>significance, without validity, without reliability - - that then they are >>worthless. That's so simple and easy to understand. > >You're to unfriendly. It does give reliable and significant results. > >Just as long as the only question is "How well does a program score on this >test". > >:) Yes, of course, Tony, for that reason God has invented the term validity so that such "tests" have at least _something_ in common with outer realities... I think Bernhard made a fantastic demonstration in answering Thorsten about MERCEDES limousines... :) The whole topic could be shrinked to that something is generally known among experts but one shouldn't talk about it in too clear language. > >Tony > >> >>Finally as a footnote, it is extremely false to appear here in this forum, >>dropping such nonsense results without any value and then quickly chicken out. >> >>"No, with you I can't debate here - because I have lost my arguments" - nonsense >>- there are no arguments to defend the WM test of CSS.
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.