Author: Enrique Irazoqui
Date: 14:34:50 01/25/00
Go up one level in this thread
On January 25, 2000 at 16:27:11, Thorsten Czub wrote: >On January 25, 2000 at 01:06:05, Harald Faber wrote: >>Because you don't understand. Even Christophe explained that to you. > >even christophe is mistaken too. > >ok - i do explain it to you. > >you can stretch a feather, and it will react dynamically. >but than, suddenly, you come to a point of no return. >and than the feather breakes and the reaction is massive. > >or: you can drive on a motorway to the left, to the right, to the left, >from one side to another. now speed up. it will still work, >but be more difficult. suddenly, you come to the point of no return, >and the car drives out of the path, the dynamically movement >stops and develops into a chaotic movement. >you get a car crash. > >now take 2 chessplayers. they are arround 50 elo different. >the machines are similar. you get reasonable results. like the >car driving left and right. or the feather. > >now take 2 chessprograms. they are arround 100 elo different. >lets call them junior-shredder2. >they are running both on 450 mhz. > >junior kills shredder. Not really. 100 Elo = 6.25-3.75 > but the car is still on track. it will not >crash. its within the range that produce sensible data. > >now take shredder2 from the 450 mhz and put it on >the 200 mhz. >now junior6 450Mhz fights vs. shredder2 200 Mhz. > >and suddenly. you come to a point where your results do not anymore >only show effects of the programs, as the car crash is not only >a reason of the car, or the feather, but of the overstressed >material breaking. > >suddenly the results become worthless. >like letting kasparov playing a 1500 ELO guy. >of course the 20 games match between kasparov produces measurable >data, as much as the car-crash produces measurable data. >but what both things connects is: Nonsense. If Junior 6 is 100 points better than Shredder 2, both on the AMD450, then Junior still on the 450 should be about 170 or 180 better than Shredder 2 on the P200MMX. Say more or less 7-3 instead of 6.25-3.75. That's what you don't understand. One more point you forget: a program gets a rating when running on a given platform and you can't really dissociate one from the other. If you suddenly use only new platforms for all programs, all references disappear and with them all ratings. >2800 ELO vs. 1500 ELO produces not very sensible data. This is a not-sensible comparison. It's 170 points difference we are talking about, and not 1300. In other words, you are saying that Kasparov should never play an under 2680 Elo player. Nonsense, isn't it? Thorsten: this is the danger of thinking in metaphores: feathers and cars. It doesn't work, it never did, it can not, it's bad thinking. Sorry for preaching. Enrique >the data you get crashing on the motorway does not tell us much >how good the car drives. it only shows that you overstressed the physics >involved. > >junio6 - shredder 2 is withtin the sensible range. > >if both run on 450 Mhz or on 200 mhz. >but junior6 on 450 vs. shredder2 on 200 produces results, >no doubt about you get data, but the data is as senseless >as the data the broken feather produces, or your car, when it crashes. >or when kasparov plays you. you get elo-points. but they do not >really be relevant. > > >>Are you allowed to criticize the SSDF methods of testing? > >of course i am ! > >Geben Sie Gedankenfreiheit Sir !! > > >> Maybe, but you are >>blind and one-track minded if you only accept results that fit to your hard- and >>software-"advices". > >pah - i give it up harald. > >the programmers tune and tune on state of the art hardware , >and you let them run on old machines that get search depths neither >the programmer nor the testers have ever seen their programs fight against >each other. > >do it. > >crash with your car, do it. > >its a free world. >if you want another world, build it.
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.