Author: blass uri
Date: 14:28:39 03/30/99
Go up one level in this thread
On March 30, 1999 at 15:58:56, Christopher R. Dorr wrote: >On March 30, 1999 at 13:47:54, blass uri wrote: > >> >>On March 30, 1999 at 08:18:33, Christopher R. Dorr wrote: >> >>>On March 29, 1999 at 22:02:24, Andrew Dados wrote: >>I believe that humans do not do their homework in learning Crafty because it is >>not important for them to win because there is no big money prize for winning. >> > >But there's no big money for beating anything on IC, so this caveat should apply >equally to all programs on there, no? I agree but it is more easy to learn Crafty because the evaluation function of crafty is not a secret when the evaluation function of other programs is not known and you can only guess it by playing. I believe that crafty is going to lose more rating relatively to other programs if humans take the games against programs seriously. And how >do we compare them? Computer-computer testing does not (IMHO) honestly reflect >strength (necessarily) against humans. > >'Why doesn't Crafty win a match against on a single processor machine?' and 'Why >doesn't Fritz win a match against Crafty on an SMP machine?' are flip sides to >the same question. They are *both* different from 'What's the strongest machine >out there?' If the question is what is the strongest machine out there then commercial should also use the best machine for them. Do you have data about the rating of Fritz(or Junior) on PIII-450? If Junior can use better machine than PII-333 at the same price of the SMP machine of crafty then it is not fair to do comparison between 2930 of Junior(Ban) and the 3000 of crafty. There are other non commercial(not free) programs that are candidates to be the strongest machine out there. Uri
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.