Author: Fernando Villegas
Date: 13:30:25 01/03/00
Go up one level in this thread
Correct. Maths means nothing if there is not a clear thing or concept behind them. But this, of course, live all us in the beginnig: how strong they really are. Problem is that the games between human and comps we have are not only few, but scarcely representative of the human kind that play chess in a whole. To put it simple; if comps plays publically only some games againts GM, we cannot know much about the program's strenght by the same reason you cannot say a man is short or tall if you compare him only with baketball players. Any system of measurement imply more or less some divertisity of that thing measured. Then you can say where it is in the general distribution curve of the quality measured. In chess a rating is not only the result of how you does againts Kasparov, but with many kind of players; if not, we does not get a point and so we all appears as patzers, with 0000 Elo rating. So even if we get many GM to play againts comps, we are not going to haver more than a very geneal, inaccurate measure of how strong they are. Fernando
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.