| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Don Dailey
Joined: 29 Apr 2008 Posts: 4506
|
Post subject: Re: Elo Increase per Doubling Posted: Thu May 10, 2012 12:43 pm |
|
|
| lkaufman wrote: |
| Don wrote: |
| lkaufman wrote: |
| In my view the rating system gradually starts to break down when players are paired with rating differences greater than the value of the first move, say 50 elo or so. Theoretically Black should play for a draw and White should play to win, but once White becomes an underdog he can play for a draw instead. Then results depend on whether Black can avoid this by playing unsoundly but not too much so and on how good White is at playing to draw instead of trying to play properly. So when we talk about the rating of "God" it all depends on whether pairings are limited to close ones or not. The results of experiments will also depend on this. The 4500 estimate does seem reasonable to me if only close pairings are allowed, but not otherwise, unless of course we assume God is reading the minds of his opponents to see what they will miss, a sort of cheating. To put it simply, I think Carlsen could get many draws with White against "perfect" play, but not against a player who modified his play drastically based on how "weak" his opponent was. Ratings cease to measure objective strength of play when this becomes a factor. I see it all the time in actual human play. For example, there is one master against whom I have an overwhelming score (something like 12 wins, 4 draws, no losses), way better than the rating gap of about 150 would predict. The reason is that he plays super-sharp but dubious defenses as Black (mainly the Benoni) which avoid draws against lower-rated opponents and allow him to obtain a much higher rating than he would get against equals or superiors. |
But essentially for a study like this we don't want the players making any assumptions. In other words they should play the board. I'm not sure the result would be valid if the players were playing for cheap-shots with unsound moves or giving up a chance to draw in a bad position (which is also unsound) even though it will give a better result against a weak opponent.
We could view this study as what would happen in a tournament where no one had information about their opponents. Here is something to ponder - if BOTH players know about their opponent, does the power of knowing cancel out? We know that any knowledge improves your chances but since both players have knowledge does one have more of an advantage than the other?
A typical problem is coming out of book with an inferior position as black even though you are the stronger player. Without knowledge you take a draw, with knowledge you avoid it so it would seem to favor the stronger player. However why can't the weaker player in other positions use the threat of a draw as leverage? He WANT'S a draw and he knows his opponent does NOT want a draw. |
That is precisely the problem. It means that ratings are not well defined even in theory unless mismatches are avoided (or not rated). With mismatches the peak possible rating becomes some function of the frequency and magnitude of mismatches. Basically I think the weaker player has more power to force a draw as White than the stronger one has to avoid one. |
The current asymptote is 4209.7 after more data collected.
Basically what you are saying is what we have always known and there are multiple issues here which is why I say this is just for fun. Here are just some of the issues:
1. True chess skill is not transitive.
2. Similar point - true chess skill is multi-dimensional.
3. ELO is not a perfect way to model chess skill.
4. No program can play perfect chess even with infinite resources due to GHI issues.
5. The exponential formula may not even be very appropriate.
6. The book could have some positions that are game theoretic wins.
Point 4 can be fixed with the removal of hash tables or a re-engineering of them which is not nearly as efficient but can solve the GHI problems. I don't think zugzwang is an issue as Komodo can detect that.
Another things that bothers me about this is that the projected ELO for a level that takes 24 hours to search a move is about 4000, surprisingly close to the asymptote. That implies that we are pretty close to perfect play and I just don't believe that. That makes me suspect the curve shape. On the other hand perhaps we are not far from the point computer checkers has been for a long time. We DO see a lot of draws at high levels and perhaps at correspondence levels we would get mostly draws?
It's unclear to me what to do about the contempt and opponent modeling issue in a game where it's not part of the rules to know anything about your opponent. But I do think a study like this should be done with a contempt factor that is high enough to cover the white advantage and a little more - i.e. all programs should play for a win (given that we don't know anything about the opponent) so that we don't see ridiculous upsets. _________________ The Optimist thinks this is the best of all possible worlds, the Pessimist fears it is true. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
|
| Subject |
Author |
Date/Time |
Elo Increase per Doubling |
Adam Hair |
Mon May 07, 2012 11:40 am |
Re: Elo Increase per Doubling |
Julien MARCEL |
Mon May 07, 2012 12:04 pm |
Re: Elo Increase per Doubling |
Adam Hair |
Mon May 07, 2012 4:48 pm |
Re: Elo Increase per Doubling |
Julien MARCEL |
Mon May 07, 2012 4:54 pm |
Re: Elo Increase per Doubling |
Adam Hair |
Mon May 07, 2012 8:50 pm |
Re: Elo Increase per Doubling |
Julien MARCEL |
Mon May 07, 2012 9:00 pm |
Re: Elo Increase per Doubling |
Mark Pearce |
Thu May 10, 2012 4:43 pm |
Re: Elo Increase per Doubling |
H.G.Muller |
Mon May 07, 2012 12:13 pm |
Re: Elo Increase per Doubling |
Michel Van den Bergh |
Mon May 07, 2012 2:01 pm |
Re: Elo Increase per Doubling |
Adam Hair |
Mon May 07, 2012 5:12 pm |
Re: Elo Increase per Doubling |
Don Dailey |
Mon May 07, 2012 6:40 pm |
Re: Elo Increase per Doubling |
Robert Wagner Campos |
Tue May 08, 2012 12:38 am |
Re: Elo Increase per Doubling |
Don Dailey |
Tue May 08, 2012 3:32 am |
Re: Elo Increase per Doubling |
Adam Hair |
Tue May 08, 2012 10:02 am |
Re: Elo Increase per Doubling |
Julien MARCEL |
Tue May 08, 2012 10:55 am |
Re: Elo Increase per Doubling |
Adam Hair |
Tue May 08, 2012 8:08 pm |
Re: Elo Increase per Doubling |
Don Dailey |
Tue May 08, 2012 11:29 am |
Re: Elo Increase per Doubling |
Kai Laskos |
Tue May 08, 2012 11:59 am |
Re: Elo Increase per Doubling |
Adam Hair |
Tue May 08, 2012 8:13 pm |
Re: Elo Increase per Doubling |
Kai Laskos |
Tue May 08, 2012 10:21 pm |
Re: Elo Increase per Doubling |
Don Dailey |
Tue May 08, 2012 10:52 pm |
Re: Elo Increase per Doubling |
Adam Hair |
Tue May 08, 2012 11:14 pm |
Re: Elo Increase per Doubling |
Kai Laskos |
Wed May 09, 2012 12:20 am |
Re: Elo Increase per Doubling |
Adam Hair |
Wed May 09, 2012 2:44 am |
Re: Elo Increase per Doubling |
H.G.Muller |
Wed May 09, 2012 8:05 am |
Re: Elo Increase per Doubling |
Adam Hair |
Wed May 09, 2012 5:12 pm |
Re: Elo Increase per Doubling |
Larry Kaufman |
Thu May 10, 2012 3:11 am |
Re: Elo Increase per Doubling |
Don Dailey |
Thu May 10, 2012 5:03 am |
Re: Elo Increase per Doubling |
Larry Kaufman |
Thu May 10, 2012 5:19 am |
Re: Elo Increase per Doubling |
Don Dailey |
Thu May 10, 2012 12:43 pm |
Re: Elo Increase per Doubling |
Peter Österlund |
Thu May 10, 2012 4:59 pm |
Re: Elo Increase per Doubling |
Julien MARCEL |
Thu May 10, 2012 5:09 pm |
Re: Elo Increase per Doubling |
Don Dailey |
Thu May 10, 2012 5:41 pm |
Re: Elo Increase per Doubling |
Don Dailey |
Thu May 10, 2012 5:46 pm |
Re: Elo Increase per Doubling |
Ed Schroder |
Tue May 08, 2012 12:09 pm |
Re: Elo Increase per Doubling |
Don Dailey |
Tue May 08, 2012 12:10 pm |
Re: Elo Increase per Doubling |
Ed Schroder |
Tue May 08, 2012 12:28 pm |
Re: Elo Increase per Doubling |
Don Dailey |
Tue May 08, 2012 12:36 pm |
Re: Elo Increase per Doubling |
Ed Schroder |
Tue May 08, 2012 1:15 pm |
Re: Elo Increase per Doubling |
Don Dailey |
Tue May 08, 2012 2:37 pm |
Re: Elo Increase per Doubling |
Julien MARCEL |
Tue May 08, 2012 3:15 pm |
Re: Elo Increase per Doubling |
Don Dailey |
Tue May 08, 2012 6:15 pm |
Re: Elo Increase per Doubling |
Peter Österlund |
Tue May 08, 2012 8:06 pm |
Re: Elo Increase per Doubling |
Don Dailey |
Tue May 08, 2012 8:25 pm |
Re: Elo Increase per Doubling |
Peter Österlund |
Tue May 08, 2012 9:00 pm |
Re: Elo Increase per Doubling |
Julien MARCEL |
Tue May 08, 2012 9:02 pm |
Re: Elo Increase per Doubling |
Don Dailey |
Tue May 08, 2012 9:06 pm |
Re: Elo Increase per Doubling |
Don Dailey |
Wed May 09, 2012 4:26 pm |
Re: Elo Increase per Doubling |
Peter Österlund |
Wed May 09, 2012 4:52 pm |
Re: Elo Increase per Doubling |
Don Dailey |
Wed May 09, 2012 5:19 pm |
Re: Elo Increase per Doubling |
Don Dailey |
Thu May 10, 2012 1:41 pm |
Re: Elo Increase per Doubling |
Don Dailey |
Thu May 10, 2012 4:52 pm |
Re: Elo Increase per Doubling |
Adam Hair |
Thu May 10, 2012 9:07 pm |
Re: Elo Increase per Doubling |
Don Dailey |
Thu May 10, 2012 10:55 pm |
Re: Elo Increase per Doubling |
Adam Hair |
Fri May 11, 2012 12:46 am |
Re: Elo Increase per Doubling |
Adam Hair |
Fri May 11, 2012 1:06 am |
Re: Elo Increase per Doubling |
Don Dailey |
Wed May 09, 2012 5:00 pm |
Re: Elo Increase per Doubling |
Adam Hair |
Tue May 08, 2012 9:05 pm |
Re: Elo Increase per Doubling |
Don Dailey |
Tue May 08, 2012 9:18 pm |
Re: Elo Increase per Doubling |
Adam Hair |
Tue May 08, 2012 11:26 pm |
Re: Elo Increase per Doubling |
Don Dailey |
Wed May 09, 2012 2:50 am |
Re: Elo Increase per Doubling |
Adam Hair |
Tue May 15, 2012 3:17 am |
Re: Elo Increase per Doubling |
Don Dailey |
Tue May 08, 2012 6:23 pm |
Re: Elo Increase per Doubling |
Ed Schroder |
Tue May 08, 2012 12:18 pm |
Re: Elo Increase per Doubling |
Don Dailey |
Tue May 08, 2012 12:25 pm |
Re: Elo Increase per Doubling |
Don Dailey |
Tue May 08, 2012 12:27 pm |
Re: Elo Increase per Doubling |
Robert Hyatt |
Tue May 08, 2012 3:36 pm |
Re: Elo Increase per Doubling |
Don Dailey |
Tue May 08, 2012 5:32 pm |
Re: Elo Increase per Doubling |
Daniel Shawul |
Fri May 11, 2012 5:48 pm |
Re: Elo Increase per Doubling |
Don Dailey |
Fri May 11, 2012 6:30 pm |
Re: Elo Increase per Doubling |
Julien MARCEL |
Fri May 11, 2012 6:52 pm |
Re: Elo Increase per Doubling |
Don Dailey |
Fri May 11, 2012 7:05 pm |
Re: Elo Increase per Doubling |
Daniel Shawul |
Fri May 11, 2012 7:08 pm |
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|