Author: Rick Bischoff
Date: 10:53:23 10/07/04
Go up one level in this thread
On October 07, 2004 at 11:38:41, Chris Welty wrote: >>However, since the sample isn't random, the entire test is meaningless. > >What makes you think the sample isn't random? It is not random since you did not say it was. Playing 30 games in a row does not count as a random sample. >>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. No, that is just wrong. To properly test a hypothesis, you do not say "Ok, looks good to me." You set your criteria before hand. i.e., do you want to be 95% confident that you have the right answer? 99% confident? Then, you decide on the proper test to use and the sample size. You do not simply quit formal testing because the results look good.
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.