Author: Graham Banks
Date: 18:46:52 01/18/06
Go up one level in this thread
On January 18, 2006 at 21:36:37, Joseph Ciarrochi wrote: >I just ran a 4/4 match of rybka beta 1 versus ruffian 2.1 and rykba won >13.5-1.5. It would be real hard for any later rybkas or any engine for that >matter to improve on this score. > >Then it occured to me: Maybe this is a core problem with our testing. Do we have >some ceiling effects going on? For example, both Grand masters and internal >masters would beat me 20 -0, and both would receive the same ELO bonus (actually >the GM would receive fewer points for beating me.). This happens despite the >fact that the GM is much better. The same thing may happen with engine >tournements. > >Should we be perhaps giving a time bonus for engines below a certain strength >(e.g. below ruffian).? If we want to maximize our sensitivity to engine >differences, perhaps we should give a sufficiently long time bonus so that >winning percentage is closer to 50% rather than 10%. > >It would be interesting to see how fruit, fritz and rybka performan against >ruffian with a 50% time bonus. > > >what do you folks think? Would time bonuses provide more meaningful data > >best >Joseph Hi Joseph, I don't think it would provide any meaningful data to be honest. I'd have thought that the main purpose of engine v engine testing was to determine which performs better given equal conditions. Just my opinion, Regards, Graham.
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.