Author: Roger D Davis
Date: 16:07:35 12/02/04
Go up one level in this thread
On December 02, 2004 at 19:02:58, Roger D Davis wrote: >On December 01, 2004 at 17:37:39, Andrei P wrote: > >>in Livshitz book "Test your chess IQ first challenge", which test human tactical >>skills, he gives a table that shows a correlation between % solved and elo >>strength. To create the table, the author tested the tactics in the book on >>humans with known elo and and then fitted the data into the table (see below). >> >>% solved elo >>100% 2200 >>90% 2000 >>80% 1800 >>70% 1600 >>60% 1400 >>50% 1200 >> >>I thought that, in general, one should be able to treat puzzles like players of >>a given strength. The stronger the puzzle,the higher its "elo". so one gets >>higher elo performance by solving higher rated puzzles etc. But according to >>this table, the puzzles do not behave like human players. For example, one could >>surmise that the average elo of the puzzles in this "tournament" is 1200 (humans >>with 1200 elo solve 50%), so according to fide expactacy, a 1600 player should >>score 92% against opposition of 1200, but scores only 70% in the table. >> >>What is the reason that relation between % solved and elo is different than for >>human-human matches? if anybody has references to how puzzles are rated that >>would be great. >> >>Thank you, Andrei > >Hi Andrei, > >I suggest you try an empirical approach. Download a bunch of Winboard engines >with ratings established by some reputable rating list. Then, give each engine 5 >seconds, 10 seconds, 30 seconds to solve each problem. You'll have to play with >the time a bit... For example, no engine can solve any problem at 0 seconds, and >probably almost all engines can solve all problems at 10 hours. What you want is >a time control at which about half the engines pass a puzzle and half fail. >There is no reason why the time control has to be the same across all puzzles, >but it might things simpler. > >If you treat puzzles as opponents for engines, then you should be able compute >an ELO for each puzzle. > >Roger When I say, "If you treat puzzles as opponents for engines, then you should be able compute an ELO for each puzzle," what I mean is... If the engine solves the puzzle in the allotted time, the engine wins. If the engine fails to solve the puzzle, the puzzle wins. Roger
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.