Milos wrote:Moreover, quoting once in a blue moon event as some example against solid statistics is really the basic fallacy that ppl who don't know much about statistics so often do.
+1.
I must say I agree.
Some lawyers I know could prove with their arguments that Night is actually Day and Day is actually Night !
Ronald de man seems to fall in the same category, juggling around figures to prove anything.
He may be a great Programmer or whatever, but seems to lack basic Common Sense.
Its perfectly obvious to the average Joe watching TCEC, that Houdini is playing much stronger and brilliantly than Komodo; whether it is because of Contempt or any other reason, is another matter.
syzygy wrote:
If a doubling in speed wins 50 Elo, so a loss of 50% speed loses 50 Elo, then a loss of 20% speed corresponds to a loss of 50 * log(0.8) / log(0.5) = 16 Elo.
You are right if number of cores are few.
But such a high number of cores the difference is about 20 Elo in the case of doubling the speed. So weakening of Komodo is about 6 Elo merely.
A large number of cores will not lower the Elo gain of a doubling in speed. (A doubling in speed is certainly much better than a doubling in number of cores. We are talking about a difference in speed here, not a difference in number of cores.)
A large time control might lower the Elo gain of a doubling in speed, but I think mostly through the increased draw rate. Since TCEC openings are deliberately somewhat unbalanced, the draw rate in TCEC is likely to be lower than one would otherwise expect at the time control used.
Milos wrote:Moreover, quoting once in a blue moon event as some example against solid statistics is really the basic fallacy that ppl who don't know much about statistics so often do.
+1.
I must say I agree.
Some lawyers I know could prove with their arguments that Night is actually Day and Day is actually Night !
Ronald de man seems to fall in the same category, juggling around figures to prove anything.
He may be a great Programmer or whatever, but seems to lack basic Common Sense.
Its perfectly obvious to the average Joe watching TCEC, that Houdini is playing much stronger and brilliantly than Komodo; whether it is because of Contempt or any other reason, is another matter.
If the average Joe carefully reads what I wrote, he will see that I never suggested that Houdini is not stronger than Komodo.
Someone suggested that Komodo's supposed NUMA bug cannot be entirely responsible for the "trashing" Komodo is receiving. I responded to point out that with a bit of bad luck, even an equally strong engine may well end up losing the first five decisive games.
So the Komodo from stages 1 and 2, possibly affected by a bug that slows it down by 20% to lose about 16 Elo, can easily lose the first 5 decisive games against the Houdini from stages 1 and 2. There is no real reason to suspect that Komodo 1970.00 is weaker than the previous version (beyond the possible slow down).
It is clear that Houdini has so far greatly outperformed Komodo. It is leading 5-0 with 22 draws.
If the enhancement of speed derived from using higher clock frequency of CPUs, you are right. But in the case of TCEC the enhancement in speed and chess power (Elo) arose from the higher number of cores. It is proved that if you enhance the number of cores the relative speed growth will be higher than the relative growth of chess power.
corres wrote:If the enhancement of speed derived from using higher clock frequency of CPUs, you are right. But in the case of TCEC the enhancement in speed and chess power (Elo) arose from the higher number of cores. It is proved that if you enhance the number of cores the relative speed growth will be higher than the relative growth of chess power.
Yes, but I was referring to Komodo's alleged NUMA bug that lowers its nps by 20% without changing the number of cores. (I do not know if Mark has really confirmed that there is a problem in the latest version, but it is clear that Komodo's reported nps has decreased.)
Sorry it is you that doesn't understand statistics. The type of calculation you do is only valid after a test has finished. Otherwise you could stop a test when LOS>=95% and everyone here knows that that does not work.
Milos wrote:
syzygy wrote:In a match with two equally strong engines, there is a 1 in 16 probability that the first 5 wins are by the same engine. Are you seriously claiming that there is no such thing as a 1 in 16 event?
I am suggesting you don't understand much about statistics. Probability is trinomial not binomial, draw probability plays a serious role. +1=99-0 is few orders of magnitude more reliable statistics than +1=0-0. Therefore, your simplified comparison with coin toss is just a wrong straw man. Chance that K is not worse than H is cdf for x>2.5sigma which is around 1% not 6.25% as your oversimplified "calculation" suggests.
But I was not even suggesting that they are equally strong. I just pointed out that there is no reason to suspect that the version of Komodo now playing is seriously bugged, i.e. beyond having lower nps than the earlier versions.
20% lower nps at TCEC TC (obvious sore looser excuse btw.) and that strong hardware is at best 10Elo. Houdini's advantage is clearly over 10Elo in the worst case (best for Komodo).
I recently ran a test that had one engine lead the other 10-1-19 before it got trashed. It just got lucky in those first 30 games. Such things happen all the time.
Again you are just mixing apples and oranges. Draw probability is not even remotely similar as to the one in TCEC. In addition TC plays a role. It's a proven fact that extremely long TC's reduce error bars compared to extremely short. Your test is most probably from bullet. So again totally incomparable. Moreover, quoting once in a blue moon event as some example against solid statistics is really the basic fallacy that ppl who don't know much about statistics so often do.
Ideas=science. Simplification=engineering.
Without ideas there is nothing to simplify.
Next season I hope TCEC will pick Asmfish instead of Stockfish.
Choosing Stockfish is worse than the Komodo 20% slow down due to a NUMA bug.
Not only because it is intentional but also because the slow down is greater than 20% I believe. Anyone please correct me.
Isaac wrote:Next season I hope TCEC will pick Asmfish instead of Stockfish.
Choosing Stockfish is worse than the Komodo 20% slow down due to a NUMA bug.
Not only because it is intentional but also because the slow down is greater than 20% I believe. Anyone please correct me.
[profanity], this is a pedantic, argumentative bunch!
Have any of the people lecturing the world on "correct statistics" even looked at the bleeping games???
IMO, Houdini has a clear 'pull' over Komodo in the middle-game, and is generally the one with winning chances. Combine that with the current score and - yea - I'd call it a 'thrashing.'
