Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: blitz versus long control rankings: knowledge versus search depth

Author: Joseph Ciarrochi

Date: 13:44:21 12/28/05


Hi folks, I just ran a correlation between the cegt long ratings (40/40
repeated) and the blitz ratings (40/4). the correlation was extremely high r =
.98, indicating that 96% of the variance in long time control ratings could be
explained by blitz ratings.

A similar phenomena happens with humans. (i.e., high correlation between blitz
and standard time control ratings).

Another interesting phenonena is that at higher elo ratings, performance level
does not drop that much between long time controls and blitz (which is why gm's
do so well at simuls).




Psyshologists have hypothesized that human chess thinking is based on two
things: 1) fast pattern recognition processes (knowledge) and 2) slower search
processes. The very high correlation between blitz and standard time controls,
and the lack of drop in performance at short time controls, have led some
psychologists to conclude that chess skill is largely based on knowledge rather
than on deep search. ( i simplify the theories, but that is about right). If you
reduce the ability to search (as is fairly true in say 3 minute blitz), skilled
chess players (say expert and above) will tend to maintain their relative chess
rankings.

(of course knowledge and search depth are related, as knowledge should help
increase search)

Oh, one last interesting finding: As you go down the chess rating ladder, the
nature of the chess thinking changes qualitatively. Lower rated players depend
much more on slow search, and their playing skill is more badly disrupted by
limiting their time. ( in other words, a 2700 rated player would win more games
in a simul against 2300 players, compared to a 1700 player facing 1300 players)



So bringing it back to chess engines.....What distinguishes the playing quality
of one engine from another? Can we apply what we have found with humans (e.g.,
it is differences in quality of knowledge)?
Or is computer chess so different as to make any comparison irrelevant?

best
joseph














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.