Author: Dan Andersson
Date: 08:47:31 11/19/05
Go up one level in this thread
On November 19, 2005 at 10:00:31, Albert Silver wrote: >On November 19, 2005 at 06:12:50, JNoomen wrote: > >>Thanks for all your comments on my Fruit-Diep report. At least it has given me >>some ideas for a new posting, which is given below. I want to discuss 4 topics I >>wanted to write about already for some time, but I never took the time do so. >>Now your reactions gave me the necessary 'boost' to sit down and write down the >>stuff. >> >>Statistics >>-------------- >>In many database programs and chess computer GUI's there is the nice option that >>it will tell you the exact statistics of the moves being played in a position, >>as well as the average Elo of the players that played the moves. This gives >>insight in how often a move was played, what it's success rate is and what type >>of players (strong, less strong) chose the moves. When building a book such >>statistics are very helpful and they can point you towards the best move in a >>position. When building a book with f.e. the ChessBase GUI, using 200.000 GM >>games over 2500 Elo, you already have quite a decent book. >> >>Still there are some topics that one should be well aware about: >> >>1. The game statistics are between humans and not between chess programs. >>2. The score of a game (0-1, 1-0 or draw) says nothing about the actual >>evaluation of a move. >>3. Between the opening moves and the final result there is a complete game to >>watch, with its ups and downs, its mistakes and brilliant moves and even >>blunders. >>4. A score of 25% for a move in a certain position never means that the move >>should be bad. In fact it can be the only move or the best move available. >>5. When using games only, you have no moves that will punish bad lines, or >>defend against unsound attacks. Because such lines are never played between >>strong players. > >Yes, this is clear. It is much like a sharp and previously successful line that >is refuted. You could have it scoring 80% over the course of 100 games, and then >one game reveals an indisputable refutation making the line more or less >unplayable. > >Statistically it will still say 79% in favor of the unplayable move, and if you >only look at the stats, you will not know this. > From a mathematical standpoint expecting a simple statistical mean to yield the value a directed acyclic graph is worthless. Mini-maxing of some sort will give a better value as well as a critical path. MvH Dan Andersson
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.