Author: Ed Schröder
Date: 08:58:28 02/25/99
Go up one level in this thread
>Posted by Vincent Diepeveen on February 25, 1999 at 07:01:54: >>It's more likely Rebel9 did not learn because the Swedish test without the >>"A" option. Some 6-7 months ago I went through the Rebel9 SSDF games >>to verify this. I stopped counting after 100 games. Rebel9's learning (in >>auto232 mode) was disabled in all these games. > >Ed, in that case i would shoot all SSDF members that did it. > >You provide the option to test without it, and they use it vs fritz. >However, the email i received from Karlsson confirms that Fritz5 >would have disabled learning anyway. > >>>Even more important than disallowing learning is the fact that only fritz5 >>>auto232 player can collect the results. >>> >>>Let me give an example what happened. >>> >>>I got about 6 months ago a call from a tester who played around 20 games at >>>auto232 player against Rebel9. >>> >>>He told me that i should stop chessprogram development, as my program >>>didn't win a single game versus rebel9. >>> >>>So i first asked whether all games were more or less the same (learning >>>from rebel9 you never know...). He told me clearly that the games were >>>not the same as he turned off learning. >>> >>>This confused me. How can one not win a SINGLE Game vs rebel9? >>>It was quickly solved when i got back the games. >>> >>>Diep won lucky several games, but those games were long. The games it >>>lost were short (short after book). Diep was mated within say 50 moves >>>or something. The games diep won were all 60 moves, after which the >>>auto232 game stopped the games. However none of the games diep had >>>mated rebel9. Further a big bunch of the games were clear draws, or >>>3 fold repetition. >>> >>>Now diep doesn't collect game results. Rebel does, and the WAY in >>>which it does caused the confusion that diep didn't win a single game: >>> >>>rebel9 screen showed a questionmark where diep won the game, >>>and some draws got a questionmark too. Where rebel9 was winning, or >>>had mated diep, it showed that rebel won. >> >>Well Vincent... there are enough people who can confirm the below >>description of Rebel9 being in auto232 mode. I think you either have >>your facts wrong or you are not so good informed. The text is taken >>from the Rebel Home Page. > >No i am very well informed and what you say confirms this. > >Games get stopped at 60 moves. Then the games diep is winning are >less than -5 for rebel, so rebel gives questionmark. If games stop at move 60 that's because auto232 has been started with /m60. I know only one person who tests like this :-) And of course if a game is aborted and doesn't have a -5.00 or +5.00 score the game is marked as "?" (result unknown) and the screen isn't updated. >>I think you just forgot to create a "new Rebel database" before you >>started auto232. As a result you were investigating old games from >>previous auto232 matches too. > >No ed this didn't happen. What happened was that rebel when winning >wins quickly, and when losing needs a long time to lose. That says something >about book and toughness of rebel, and the internal evaluation of it. > >So this mistake was made by reading the screen of your database, and >your algorithm exactly reflects why it happened. Total score from the database always reflects the match score on the screen. The score on the screen is nice for an indication but after an auto232 session you have to go to all games manually anyway and edit all the "?" (result unknown) cases by hand. I always use the default auto232 setting "/m100". In your case (using /m60) the error rate is of course very high as there will be many games terminated with scores like +1.xx or -2.xx. And then what? It's not always clear to judge such games. Better use "/m100" IMO as it pays off in the end. Ed
This page took 0.01 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.