Author: Vincent Diepeveen
Date: 09:24:00 01/18/00
Go up one level in this thread
On January 18, 2000 at 11:27:43, Will Singleton wrote: >On January 18, 2000 at 11:15:19, Francesco Di Tolla wrote: > >>The formula initially used the clock instead of the logarithm of it. It was even >>worse so I suggested to take the log of the clock which, at that time, seemed to >>give a better description of threal situation. >>I suggested the log because it is quite clear that a doubling of the clock does >>give just a little extra elo and not a doubling of it. There are many >>"non-linearities" both in the increase of strength with the clock and in the >>increase of the elo with the increase of strenght. >> >>Probably there is no such an easy formula to be found to better describe the >>relationships between programs at different clocks, but this is the best we have >>found so far. >>If you have a better idea (and saying that it sucks is not a better idea) let >>all us know. >> >>regards >>Franz > >Yes, I am always open to suggestions. Come up with a better formula, Vincent, >I'll use it. Remove the silly R(Mhz) formula Will. >Will
This page took 0.01 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.