Author: Chris Welty
Date: 08:38:41 10/07/04
Go up one level in this thread
>However, since the sample isn't random, the entire test is meaningless. What makes you think the sample isn't random? >If you could test engines like that, you would use the binomial >distribution and would need more than 30 random games from those engines to >properly test the probability of one engine winning over another. That's just wrong. The number of games you need is dependent on the results of the games. > However, >since it is not really possible to get a "random game", you will need to play, >as others on this board have suggested, you will need to increase the sample >size to 1000 or so. Again, that's wrong. The sample size you need depends on the outcome of the games. If after 500 games the result is 500-0 would you agree that one engine is better than another?
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.