+102 Elo by FIDE table. Good! IPON gives +66 for this difference. Of course, small (?!) number of games and head-to-head only can be a bit misleading. But I am satisfied with the result.
P.S. Before, I did the same match but with fixed depth of 11 plies for both. The result was 51.5-48.5, only +10 Elo for K.CCT. That leads me to the conclusion that the strength gain is mostly based on search improvements (but I do not doubt that there were eval improvements as well).
+102 Elo by FIDE table. Good! IPON gives +66 for this difference. Of course, small (?!) number of games and head-to-head only can be a bit misleading. But I am satisfied with the result.
P.S. Before, I did the same match but with fixed depth of 11 plies for both. The result was 51.5-48.5, only +10 Elo for K.CCT. That leads me to the conclusion that the strength gain is mostly based on search improvements (but I do not doubt that there were eval improvements as well).
Actually, you can't tell anything based on fixed depth searches, because we can (and often do) very easily make tradeoffs between speed and "quality" by changing various selectivity parameters. So for example, we could have improved the eval tremendously, but also gone "more selective", in which case the fixed depth results might be about even but timed play would show the gains. I'm not saying this is the case here, just that you can't tell this way.
IPON gives +66 for this difference. Of course, small (?!) number of games and head-to-head only can be a bit misleading. But I am satisfied with the result.