Author: Joseph Ciarrochi
Date: 04:05:19 01/05/06
Go up one level in this thread
Thanks for your comemnts. I should note that i teach statistics at the university level and certianly understand what you are saying. An additional interesting question is this: Is the difference between the CEGT fritz and fruit rating significantly different than the difference between the SSDF fritz and fruit rating? The cegt has huge numbers and it is just possible that the difference between differences is significant. I guess my main question was, are there any differences in testing conditions, that might lead to a significant difference in relative ranks.? On January 05, 2006 at 05:11:10, Martin Andersen2 wrote: >On January 04, 2006 at 06:28:01, Joseph Ciarrochi wrote: > >>I wonder why fruit seems better that fritz9 here, wheras in the cegt list they >>are almost identical. Is there some critical difference in testing conditions >>that can explain the discrepency? Or, is this just a sampling error issue? >> > >There's no discrepany between cegt and SSDF. > >SSDF: Fruit 2.2.1 has a rating of 2852 +35 -33. >These numbers mean that Fruit's true rating is somewhere between >2819 and 2887. There's even a small but nonzero chance that the true >rating is outside this interval. > >Fritz 9.0 has a rating of 2819 +32 -30 on SSDF, with the true rating >in the area 2789 - 2851. >The two intervals of Fruit and Fritz' ratings overlap, meaning that >their true rating could be the same. > >cegt: Fruit 2.2 rating of 2789 +- 11 > Fritz 9.0 rating of 2783 +- 12 > >So also on cegt their true rating could be the same. > >Martin.
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.