Author: Carl McClain Morris, Jr.
Date: 16:49:17 12/10/99
Go up one level in this thread
On December 10, 1999 at 13:24:32, Roger wrote: >I don't see any problem with recalibrating the SSDF, though doing it with as >many of the top programs as possible and with as large a sample of games as >possible would be recommended. > >Whether it should be done, or not, can be settled empirically. Differences >between the ELOs of two players translate into probabilities of winning and >losing. Accordingly, it ought to be possible to develop the recalibrated ratings >using a pool of, say, twenty games of three programs at 40/120, and then how >that these new ratings predict the pattrern of wins and losses better than the >old ratings. > >No one can argue with that. And until it can be shown that the new ratings are >better able to predict that the old ones, then I'd just leave it alone. > >Recalibration is inevitable, because GM-computer games will become much more >common. > >Roger I have a feeling that in the event of GM-computer games, the computer rating may even be higher. When you speak of Fritz, Hiarcs, Nimzo, Chess-Tiger and others, we may find those rating higher than now posted. Carl
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.