TalkChess.com

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.

corres wrote:

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.

shrapnel wrote:

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.

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.

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.

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.

• * Asmfish
  * Brainfish
  * McBrain
  * DON
  * Sting
  * SugaR