Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Statistics... Thanks Ross

Author: Peter Skinner

Date: 00:14:17 01/29/06

Go up one level in this thread


On January 29, 2006 at 02:50:36, chandler yergin wrote:

>On January 28, 2006 at 17:43:37, Ross Boyd wrote:
>
>>On January 28, 2006 at 16:27:48, chandler yergin wrote:
>>
>>>Mark Twain once said.. "There are Lies, Damn Lies and .. Statistics"
>>>It's hard to disprove Statistics, they are what they are.
>>>Four hundred  years of Chess Theory & Millions of games played have proven
>>>that White has a significant advantage with the first move.
>>>Black cannot overcome this, in fact Black cannot even equalize.
>>>Whites Overall Performance is 55% compared to Blacks 45%
>>>The error factor is insignificant.
>>
>>>Whichever Human or Computer plays the Openings by ECO Classification
>>>that are better for White will Win.
>>>Whichever Human or Computer plays the Openings by ECO Classification
>>>that are better for Black will win.
>>
>>Don't you mean they will improve their win/loss percentage?
>Yes Thanks..
>>
>>>It's really that simple.
>>>
>>>So what does Testing Engines against Engines Prove?
>>
>>Not sure what exactly you're saying here.
>>
>>Testing engines vs engines is just a way of gauging relative strength. Rigorous
>>testing against humans is prohibitive time-wise and there are other variables...
>>humans have 'off' days which can skew the results... a computer sparring partner
>>can be relied on to perform consistently.
>Exactly, thanks.
>>
>>If you mean in the context of Opening books, its better to test using a set of
>>standard balanced positions so that it is raw strength we are measuring rather
>>than how good an opening book is.
>Yes, Opening books are very shallow really..
>>
>>Tuning the engine's opening book is just another step in an engine's
>>development.
>Yes, especially in Engine vs Engine games.
>>
>>Ross
>
>        Whites Overall Performance is 55% compared to Blacks 45%
>               These seem to be the Magic numbers.
>              Millions of games played confirm this.
>              What would you conclude from this?
>
>
>Anyone?
>Thanks,
>Chan

Ross is simply stating what I tried to explain to you.

When testing an engine it is best to use a set position rather than an opening
book as you can tune books for opponents.

When using single positions or even the Nunn positions you can see where the
search/eval is lacking and needs to be tweaked or corrected. Since the opening
book is only one facet to optimizing a chess program, the statistics of
white/black wins is irrelevant in the context we are speaking about.

I am not doubting your numbers at all, but rather the way you are trying to use
them to disprove a well known fact. Engines _can_ be tuned outside the opening
library, as _any_ position can happen at _any_ time. The search/eval then become
more important than what was done from the opening book. Knowledge is one way a
program can be improved, search speed it another, praying to a Buddha can be one
as well.

The opening library is _not_ the be all and end all of chess.

Peter



This page took 0.01 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.