David Fotland schrieb:
Many Faces also had more trouble against pachi than you would expect from
its rating. Perhaps Pachi is generally stronger, but throws away some
percentage of games (even against weak players) because of some bug.
Seems plausible. But instead of guessing, the standard deviation of the
rating should give a good indication of such problems. So why doesn't
CGOS provide the standard deviation of ranks? Should be easy enough to
calculate and it provides valuable information about the "buggyness" of
a program.
In physics, a measured value without standard deviation is useless. For
good reasons.
David
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] [mailto:computer-go-
[email protected]] On Behalf Of Brian Sheppard
Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 12:48 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: [computer-go] Rating variability on CGOS
About two weeks ago I took Pebbles offline for an extensive overhaul of
its
board representation. At that time Valkyria 3.3.4 had a 9x9 CGOS rating
of
roughly 2475.
When I looked today, I saw Valkyria 3.3.4 rated at roughly 2334, so I
wondered what was going on.
I found a contributing factor: Valkyria has massively different results
against Pachi than against Pebbles. It happens that Pachi started
playing a
day or two after Pebbles went offline.
Pebbles and Pachi are both rated around 2200, but Valkyria shreds
Pebbles a
lot more often than Pachi:
Pachi: 185 / 273 = 67.8%
Pebbles: 429 / 503 = 85.3%
There are a lot of lessons here...
_______________________________________________
computer-go mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
_______________________________________________
computer-go mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
_______________________________________________
computer-go mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
