Author: Ingo Bauer
Date: 12:02:57 08/30/04
Go up one level in this thread
On August 30, 2004 at 15:00:43, Dann Corbit wrote: >On August 30, 2004 at 14:57:35, Ingo Bauer wrote: > >>On August 30, 2004 at 14:51:01, Uri Blass wrote: >> >>>On August 30, 2004 at 13:51:48, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>> >>>>On August 30, 2004 at 12:24:54, Volker Böhm wrote: >>>> >>>>>On August 30, 2004 at 10:02:54, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>On August 30, 2004 at 08:30:34, Kurt Utzinger wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>On August 30, 2004 at 08:12:52, Jouni Uski wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>Eine FPGA-Karte untersucht momentan ca. 3 Millionen Positionen/Sekunde. 16 >>>>>>>>Karten machen daher theoretisch 48 MPos/sec. (Donninger) >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>Jouni >>>>>>> >>>>>>> If Hydra made 48 Mpos/sec this again proves (in comparison >>>>>>> with the 2 Mpos/sec on Quad-Opteron server with 4 CPU's of >>>>>>> Shredder) that the number of pos/sec can't be taken as a >>>>>>> reliable value for the goodness of a chess program. It's >>>>>>> of course simply impossible to compare apples and organes. >>>>>>> Kurt [http://www.utzingerk.com] >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>Don't forget that Hydra ripped Shredder's head off. So the NPS _might_ be >>>>>>significant here... >>>>> >>>>>Didn´t I´ve heard you saying that 10 games are not enough to draw a >>>>>statistically significant conclusion on the playing strength? >>>>> >>>>>Greetings Volker >>>> >>>> >>>>With two _close_ opponents, correct. But if one is seriously stronger, as hydra >>>>appeared to be, 10 games is plenty. >>> >>>We do not know if hydra is seriously stronger. >>> >>>You cannot start by assuming that hydra is significantly stronger when this is >>>the question. >>> >>>If you see 10-0 you can say based on the result that Hydra is significantly >>>stronger but when you see 5.5-2.5 you cannot claim it based on the result and >>>you only can say that you do not know if it is significantly stronger based on >>>the result. >> >>Just some facts: >> >>10 +3 =7 -0 65.0% TP = +107 Elo 68%->[+70,+206] 95%->[+34,+351] >> >>Is if 107 Elo "seriously or significantly" stronger? > >Don't forget the Cadaques experiment. At one point it was a total blowout for >Junior, and then Fritz knocked Junior silly. A small sequence can have a lot of >error in many ways. It is also possible that the points of the opponent were a >freak accident. So it might be 500 Elo stronger. Until 30 games have been >played, the statisical significance is insignificant. > >Chances are good that Hydra is very strong. But we do not have enough data to >really know it. Sorry I made a mistake. It where only 8 games!!! 8 +3 =5 -0 68.7% TP = +136 Elo 68%->[+82,+246] 95%->[+31,+433] Sorry again Ingo
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.