Strongest Fruit - what's the verdict?

[mclane]

there have been 1512 games.


enough to conclude about the software. and - if you have the chance to look the games when they are played - enough to make conclusions about the software.

if you do not believe this is possible it is imo your problem.

computerchess is imo nothing where you work with statistics.
statistics happens when the products are finished and sold, then people come and do statistics.
but when you develop a problem you need more than statistics.

more than bean counting.

[Dann Corbit]

From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Durian
food writer Richard Sterling says: "... its odor is best described as pig-shit, turpentine and onions, garnished with a gym sock..."

On the other hand, some people love the stuff.

[Andrew]

Thanks Igor, this is interesting! I'm playing 2.3.1 at the moment vs
Rybka 2.3.2a in some 720' games and fruit has won 1 and drawn 2!

However the options screen is too tall, does anyone know how to make
the whole thing appear properly? (this is under XP)

Andrew

Hello Andrew that depends a little on what interface, GUI you are using I think. As far as I know ChessPartner is the only one with a scroll down menu for the UCI options and I have seen no problems there. The new Shredder interface has three columns I was told by Stefan, but now that Shredder 11 is delayed a bit, maybe Stefan could take a look whether that is still enough and whether a scroll down menu would maybe be possible? I hope maybe Stefan Meyer-Kahlen reads here...

By the way I can't quite figure out what is Fruit 05/11/03 HD 1-2 exactly for version? Does it have to do with History Depths?

Regards, Eelco

Eelco, this happens in the Fritz 10 interface

Andrew

[Dann Corbit]

there have been 1512 games.


enough to conclude about the software. and - if you have the chance to look the games when they are played - enough to make conclusions about the software.

if you do not believe this is possible it is imo your problem.

computerchess is imo nothing where you work with statistics.
statistics happens when the products are finished and sold, then people come and do statistics.
but when you develop a problem you need more than statistics.

more than bean counting.

There are lies, damn lies, and statistics.
Still, statistical things often reveal surprising truths and possibilities that are very counter-intuitive and none-the-less correct.

Recall that statistics say nothing about an individual experiment (e.g. who will win *this* chess game) except that one outcome may be more likely than another. But after a very large number of experiments have been performed you can make better and better generalizations based on the facts gathered.

I think that looking at the games can also be misleading. For instance, suppose that you study a game and see a superb brilliancy played by program X, causing a win over program Y. It may very well be true that program X had no idea it was a good move or had a completely wrong plan and more or less blundered into the right combination by random chance. In another situation where the same sort of combination or structures allowing for a positional move are available , the same program might make a terrible choice.

Remember, statisticians are never wrong. At worst, they're probably wrong.

[mclane]

to me statisticians are historicians. there is nothing they find out i did not know much earlier and before they found it out.

the historicians do not live LIFE. they live later and try to find out what has happened. when i watch the games i am living life.
therefore i need less events to come to a judgement.

when i have found out something, i do use statistics too. but not to find out something new. only to proof the theory.

but using statistics BEFORE to come to conclusions takes IMO too long.
statistics can only find out things that is known before they find it out IMO.

[mariaclara]

but using statistics BEFORE to come to conclusions takes IMO too long.
statistics can only find out things that is known before they find it out IMO.

hmmmmmmmm...............so lets use fortunetellers...

[Tony Thomas]

to me statisticians are historicians. there is nothing they find out i did not know much earlier and before they found it out.

the historicians do not live LIFE. they live later and try to find out what has happened. when i watch the games i am living life.
therefore i need less events to come to a judgement.

when i have found out something, i do use statistics too. but not to find out something new. only to proof the theory.

but using statistics BEFORE to come to conclusions takes IMO too long.
statistics can only find out things that is known before they find it out IMO.

You have no idea what statistics is, do you? I see that you are still in denial.

[mclane]

statistic is the effort to measure something others know from experience.
while the experience is a qualifying method, statistic is a quantifying method.

if you have a friend and you know him by experience, thats quality.
if you get statistics about your friend, thats quantity.

which judgement about your friend is more precise. his statistical data or the experience you made with him ?

statistics is something for people who try to find out something others knew long time before. a waste of time it is. bean counting.

[George Tsavdaris]

statistic is the effort to measure something others know from experience.

LOL!

Statistics beat experience many many times.....
If you have a feeling about something, you don't know if it's true. Statistics will tell you if it is.....

if you have a friend and you know him by experience, thats quality.
if you get statistics about your friend, thats quantity.

We are not talking about these situations of course.
We are talking about experiments, like results of Chess engines for example.

statistics is something for people who try to find out something others knew long time before. a waste of time it is. bean counting.

ABSOLUTELY Incorrect!

If they have you test drug medicines, most medicines would be ineffective and dangerous.....

[nczempin]

statistic is the effort to measure something others know from experience.
while the experience is a qualifying method, statistic is a quantifying method.

if you have a friend and you know him by experience, thats quality.
if you get statistics about your friend, thats quantity.

which judgement about your friend is more precise. his statistical data or the experience you made with him ?

statistics is something for people who try to find out something others knew long time before. a waste of time it is. bean counting.

Well, your kind of view leads far away from science, and straight towards religion.