Author: Eelco de Groot
Date: 19:55:33 12/11/99
Go up one level in this thread
On December 11, 1999 at 12:53:27, Jason Williamson wrote: >Just a point, we already have a lot of programs being rated in a elo like >fashion, vs both computers AND humans. Of course I mean the ICC. It is >interseting to note that computers that exclusivly play humans are about 200 >points higher rated on avg then the same engine on simular hardware playing both >computers and humans. > >Jaosn Williamson > Well yes, this might be so but isn't that practically all based on fast time-controls? Computers/programs excel there against humans so it is no wonder that they have high ratings.. Eelco >On December 11, 1999 at 12:23:57, Ed Schröder wrote: > >>Changed the subject, it's my favorite one these days... >> >>>Posted by Jeff Lischer on December 11, 1999 at 11:09:56: >>> >>>In Reply to: Re: New rating list based upon Human games /SSDF brought back >>>into line posted by Stephen A. Boak on December 11, 1999 at 04:21:56: >>> >>>On December 11, 1999 at 04:21:56, Stephen A. Boak wrote: >>> >>>> >>>>3. It is not obvious that the relative rating of computer programs in comp-comp >>>>play will hold for the same programs when they play humans at 40/2 time >>>>controls. >> >>Regarding this a few answers and questions from the CHESS2010 poll >>from my pages (so far 329 entries): >> >>Question 3: We have tried to explain that being the strongest chess program >>against other chess programs doesn't necessarily mean that the program in >>question is also the strongest chess program against humans. Do you agree >>with this proposition? >> >> I agree with the proposition 276 >> I do not agree with the proposition 31 >> ABSTAIN 20 >> >>The vast majority simply agrees that comp-comp is something different than >>human-comp. >> >> >>Question 8: If chess programs would have a FIDE rating would the order of >>chess programs in comparison with computer-computer lists (such as the SSDF) >>be different and to what extend? >> >> SSDF vs FIDE would differ +/- 100 elo (or more) 111 >> SSDF vs FIDE would differ not much (+/- 50 elo) 112 >> SSDF vs FIDE would be in balance (+/- 20 elo) 23 >> ABSTAIN 80 >> >>I am quite surprised that only 23 people (that's < 10%) think that a comp-comp >>list (SSDF taken as an example) would reflect a human-comp list. I agree too >>with the proposition but there is no evidence to support it as it remains a >>feeling. >> >> >>>In fact, isn't Rebel Century a perfect example of this? Last year, after the >>>release of Rebel 10C, Ed Schroder was involved in discussions on Rebelboard >>>(and here, I think) regarding the differences in programming a computer for play >>>against humans as opposed to play against other computers. At that time, Ed >>>decided to optimize Rebel for play against humans, whereas Tiger would be more >>>optimized for play against computers. In developing Rebel Century, he returned >>>to Rebel 10B as his starting point. >>> >>>In doing this, Ed realized he would likely be sacrificing performance versus >>>other computer programs (e.g. Fritz, Hiarcs) for the sake of improved >>>performance versus strong humans. It appears that Ed has been successful -- >>>Rebel Century is doing well in the GM Series and may show a FIDE rating ~2500. >>>It doesn't seem fair, however, to then turn around and say other programs would >>>have even higher FIDE ratings based on the computer-computer games of the >>>SSDF. >> >>You are quite right. Another poll question as an answer: >> >>Question 9: We have tried to explain that adding new chess knowledge which >>makes a chess program a better positional player could lower the playing >>strength in the comp-comp area and that removing chess knowledge which >>makes a chess program a lower positional player on the other hand could >>improve its performance in the comp-comp area, then how would you like >>chess companies to handle this phenomenon in the future? >> >> Do not compromize to the program's positional understanding 251 >> Do not compromize to the program's comp-comp performance 37 >> ABSTAIN 39 >> >>After seeing the overwhelming majority "Do not compromize to the program's >>positional understanding" I felt safe enough to focus on human-comp for the >>future. Sometimes Internet is just great :-) >> >>Ed >> >>PS, the full poll results can be found at: http://www.rebel.nl/resu2010.htm >> >>Question 5 and 6 are pretty outdated, it would be nice to have them >>recalculated now that Tiger tops the SSDF list and the fact Rebel has >>played its games in the GM challenge.
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.