Author: enrico carrisco
Date: 11:39:14 07/31/05
Go up one level in this thread
On July 30, 2005 at 09:41:48, Günther Simon wrote: >On July 30, 2005 at 06:01:06, Drexel,Michael wrote: > >> >>...at all with this time controls and hardware used? >> >>http://chessprogramming.org/cccsearch/ccc.php?art_id=364117 >> >>Sandro claimed Shredder8.bkt and more effective learning should increase the >>rating by about 35 points over Shredder 8 CB. >> >>Michael > >May be Shredder 9 increased its strength especially at shorter time controls, >when previous versions were known to be better at long time controls? > >Guenther This is exactly why authors/testers do not like to quote improvements in terms of ELO estimates. It's asked for and asked for and then when an _estimate_ is provided, it's never put to rest if it is not _exactly_ correct. I do not feel Sandro was trying to mislead anyone and was giving his best known estimate at the time. Certainly the margin between Shredder 8 UCI and Shredder 9 UCI is less than between Shredder 8 CB and Shredder 9 UCI (that the SSDF outlines.) It's too bad the SSDF list didn't stick with all UCI testing or all CB testing, however. Otherwise, all UCI and all CB versions of Shredder should have been tested. -elc.
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.