Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 12:55:40 10/21/99
Go up one level in this thread
On October 21, 1999 at 14:33:39, Dave Gomboc wrote: >On October 21, 1999 at 10:03:22, Chris Carson wrote: > >>On October 21, 1999 at 09:03:34, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>> >>>I would ignore it. It simply won't work. Ferret and CM are totally different >>>in their searches. It would be impossible to tune the eval and make the two >>>programs play the same. Match for a specific set of games? Of course. Match >>>in real games? not a chance. >> >>I agree with Bob. I have CM6K and you can create a personality, but >>it will not be an exact or close to prediction of future move selection >>for a given person or program. This is a type of regression technique >>(known data to predict future events), the error of measure for this would >>be very large (ie: not very accurate). Just my opinion. :) >> >>Best Regards, >>Chris Carson > >The original poster might find another 70 games that weren't in the initial set, >and compare to see the matching rate with those. > >Dave This "approach" is just like tuning a program's eval so it will match the moves made by a GM. Without understanding why the GM made the moves in the first place. For a finite set of moves, you can get very accurate matches using a least-squares approach to fitting. But when you play a _new_ game, you find just how badly this does. Ferret and CM are so different in their search approach and evaluations, that trying to adjust one to act like the other would be hopeless... An interesting exercise? probably. But accurate? nope.
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.