Author: Dann Corbit
Date: 11:59:21 01/26/99
Go up one level in this thread
On January 26, 1999 at 13:49:29, Don Dailey wrote: >Hi Dann, > >I'm not trying to prove guilt, I'm trying to prove innocence. I don't >think this test can prove guilt but it can easily raise enough doubt >that we should back off. > >If you are right and all or even one of the programs give a high match, >then there is plenty of room for doubt and we give them the benefit of >the doubt which I think is fair. If however, Crafty matches >significantly higher percentage, then we have something to talk about. >I won't be claiming guilt in this case, just that there is still >room to talk. > >I have already discovered that running 60 seconds on Cilkchess will >guarantee a much lower match rate, so I am a little concerned that >people will run this very short 60 second test and try to draw unfair >conclusions from it. > >We will have enough data to come to some conclusion, even if the >conclusion is that we are not sure! We also have log files from >them and an executable. So we should be able to come to some >intelligent conclusion. If nothing else, I want to know for my >own edification. The point which I was hoping to make was that a 100% match does not prove guilt nor does a 100% failure to match prove innocense. This exercise can prove neither (IMO - but I could be wrong, of course). For example, I could change a couple numeric constants in the eval function of Cilkchess and make it play wildly different. It would probably take 15 minutes of effort. Or I could completely change the architecture and have it play much the same. My point is that the exercise does not have the intended effect.
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.