Author: Vasik Rajlich
Date: 06:56:58 09/11/04
Go up one level in this thread
On September 10, 2004 at 23:55:25, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On September 10, 2004 at 22:55:30, enrico carrisco wrote: > >>On September 10, 2004 at 17:14:44, Robert Hyatt wrote: >> >>>On September 10, 2004 at 15:56:45, Sandro Necchi wrote: >>> >>>>On September 09, 2004 at 10:50:49, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>>> >>>>>On September 08, 2004 at 19:12:56, Matthew White wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>On September 03, 2004 at 15:07:17, Graham Banks wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>On September 03, 2004 at 13:17:51, robert flesher wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>If you are going to waste your precious time and everyone else here then please >>>>>>>>indicate that you have given unfair advantages to certain engines. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>I think people should read the setup details and maybe look through the whole >>>>>>>range of games before going off half cocked! >>>>>>>All engines are using the Fritz powerbook tournament settings. There is the odd >>>>>>>strange opening due to the maximum variety setting used, but I think you'll find >>>>>>>that this has equally affected all engines and that no particular engine has >>>>>>>been disadvantaged. >>>>>>>For the final of the tournament I intend to optimise the powerbook settings, so >>>>>>>this should eliminate any unusual openings. >>>>>>>Graham. >>>>>> >>>>>>Would it be a more equitable test to have each pair of opponents play both sides >>>>>>of each oddball opening? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>No... >>>> >>>>OK, I try to find an example to show you what you are stating. Again Bob is 100% >>>>correct. >>>> >>>>Now as you know the F1 cars do not use the same tyres; mainly there are 2 >>>>company making them; let's call them X and Y. >>>>Since everybody is asked to improve as much as possible the latest improvements >>>>involve the tyres too. >>>> >>>>So if you state that ALL cars needs to use the same X tyres to eliminate >>>>advantages, you are not doing that as you are favoring those who have been >>>>working in cooperation with company X and penalizing those who have been >>>>cooperating with company Y, so improving the cars with those tyres. >>>> >>>>In your case it is even more unfair as the car company could make changes to >>>>reduce/eliminate the handicap, but you are chosing a chess program which is as >>>>it is and will suffer from that. >>>> >>>>If you think that you know more than me in this field I give you some figures: >>>> >>>>1) I am testing/checking computer games since 1976 >>>>2) I think I have seen/checked something like 140.000 games (about 50% played by >>>>computers) >>>>3) I have tested/own something like 250 chess programs/chess boards (including >>>>experimenthal versions too). >>>> >>>>So, I can state that Bob is correct without any doubts. >>>> >>>>Sandro >>> >>> >>>I don't even understand how the topic keeps coming up over and over. Games with >>>ponder=off. Games with odd books. Games with random books. Games with both >>>sides forced into the same opening positions. Games with no learning. Games >>>with learning reset between games. And I don't see how any of that produces >>>anything but excessive noise... >>> >>>But those of us that have done this a while understand the problem... >>> >>>Thanks... >> >>Well, let's not forget about John Nunn's positions. Certainly, testing two >>engines and forcing them into these positions as either color is a useful >>benchmark. > >No it isn't. Again, have you _ever_ seen a serious human tournament were >players were forced to play a specific opening, regardless of whether GM >consensus says the positions are equal or not? > >Of course not... > >And you can't expect the programs to be put in the same predicament either. A >program _might_ play all positions well. It _might_ play some better. I'd say >the author has a feel for that and assists via reasonable book line preparation >to avoid the positions where the program plays poorly, and vice-versa. Najdorf >lines come to mind as very dangerous and many avoid them completely for that >reason... > > >> >>If not, then Hiarcs 9 was produced on about 50% excessive noise. Maybe we can >>turn it into an MP3 player... :P > >Hiarcs might do well in _any_ position. But then I know human players that play >any opening as well. But not _all_ humans do that. neither do all programs... > > >> >> >>-elc. You could say that each engine has a "tournament strength" and a "general strength". The latter can be a good measurement of how useful the engine is as an analysis tool, for example. Vas
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.