Author: Sven Reichard
Date: 12:28:21 11/15/99
Go up one level in this thread
On November 15, 1999 at 03:43:15, Shep wrote: >As a mathematician, I have to jump in here and correct you. :) >You probably mean "statistically improbable". >It is not _impossible_ to find the optimal CM settings (or to win the lottery a >million successive times) because the number of settings is finite, so you could >(given a large, but finite amount of time) try them all out and come up with the >best one. > >Sorry to be nit-picking, but I felt that had to be said. :)) > >--- >Shep As another mathematician, I have to jump in here and correct you :)) If there were an algorithm that would give us a numerical playing strength of any given engine, your approach would work (in a finite number of steps). However, lacking such an algorithm, your optimization problem (on a discrete space, to make things worse) is not well-defined. Sven.
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.