My two cents on Rybka's disqualification

[garybelton]

The strength increases exponentially due to hardware.
The strength increases exponentially due to software.

A double exponential increase is good news to me.

Why should you care if a program named Fire rises in Elo or a program named Snow does it?

I don't give a crap what it is called, as long as it does rise in elo (junkie mentality).

[Dann Corbit]

The strength increases exponentially due to hardware.
The strength increases exponentially due to software.

A double exponential increase is good news to me.

Of course, exponential progress + exponential progress is just exponential progress.

The good news is that the advance may actually be superexponential in both categories. It apears from crude measurements that software is advancing faster than hardware and there are those who have seen superexponential growth measured in hardware over a broad expanse of time (going way back before computers, even).

Why should you care if a program named Fire rises in Elo or a program named Snow does it?

I don't give a crap what it is called, as long as it does rise in elo (junkie mentality).

Then, you see, it does not matter if fire gets stronger to you as long as something does get stronger. And something will get stronger. So you have no worries.

[Laskos]

The strength increases exponentially due to hardware.
The strength increases exponentially due to software.

Logarithmically.

[Dann Corbit]

The strength increases exponentially due to hardware.
The strength increases exponentially due to software.

Logarithmically.

The Elo scale is logarithmic, but the increase in compute power and playing strength is exponential.

In the same way that a 9.0 earthquake is much larger than a 7.0 earthquake, an Elo of 2900 is tremendously larger than an Elo of 2600.

Taking the log of one million does not make the million become smaller.
It just turns it into a smaller number that is easier for some to understand.

[Laskos]

The strength increases exponentially due to hardware.
The strength increases exponentially due to software.

Logarithmically.

The Elo scale is logarithmic, but the increase in compute power and playing strength is exponential.

In the same way that a 9.0 earthquake is much larger than a 7.0 earthquake, an Elo of 2900 is tremendously larger than an Elo of 2600.

Taking the log of one million does not make the million become smaller.
It just turns it into a smaller number that is easier for some to understand.

Take the strength as % and compare it to Elo, the curve is even flatter than linear for % versus Elo, and pretty linear for small Elo differences. So, the strength in % (do you have a better definition?) is going even slower than logarithm. The strength change is at best (fastest) logarithmic in hardware and software.

Kai

[Dann Corbit]

The strength increases exponentially due to hardware.
The strength increases exponentially due to software.

Logarithmically.

The Elo scale is logarithmic, but the increase in compute power and playing strength is exponential.

In the same way that a 9.0 earthquake is much larger than a 7.0 earthquake, an Elo of 2900 is tremendously larger than an Elo of 2600.

Taking the log of one million does not make the million become smaller.
It just turns it into a smaller number that is easier for some to understand.

Take the strength as % and compare it to Elo, the curve is even flatter than linear for % versus Elo, and pretty linear for small Elo differences. So, the strength in % (do you have a better definition?) is going even slower than logarithm. The strength change is at best (fastest) logarithmic in hardware and software.

Kai

For strength, I choose the measurement of number of chessboards intelligently condidered per second.

I don't know if it works for people. It works great for chess computers.
By 'intelligently' I also imply that we look at the important boards and discard examination of the stupid looking choices unless we really have to consider them.

[Dann Corbit]

The strength increases exponentially due to hardware.
The strength increases exponentially due to software.

Logarithmically.

The Elo scale is logarithmic, but the increase in compute power and playing strength is exponential.

In the same way that a 9.0 earthquake is much larger than a 7.0 earthquake, an Elo of 2900 is tremendously larger than an Elo of 2600.

Taking the log of one million does not make the million become smaller.
It just turns it into a smaller number that is easier for some to understand.

Take the strength as % and compare it to Elo, the curve is even flatter than linear for % versus Elo, and pretty linear for small Elo differences. So, the strength in % (do you have a better definition?) is going even slower than logarithm. The strength change is at best (fastest) logarithmic in hardware and software.

Kai

For strength, I choose the measurement of number of chessboards intelligently condidered per second.

I don't know if it works for people. It works great for chess computers.
By 'intelligently' I also imply that we look at the important boards and discard examination of the stupid looking choices unless we really have to consider them.

I should add that the 'boards per second' is almost exclusively a function of hardware and 'intelligently' is almost exclusively a function of software.

[Dann Corbit]

The strength increases exponentially due to hardware.
The strength increases exponentially due to software.

Logarithmically.

The Elo scale is logarithmic, but the increase in compute power and playing strength is exponential.

In the same way that a 9.0 earthquake is much larger than a 7.0 earthquake, an Elo of 2900 is tremendously larger than an Elo of 2600.

Taking the log of one million does not make the million become smaller.
It just turns it into a smaller number that is easier for some to understand.

Take the strength as % and compare it to Elo, the curve is even flatter than linear for % versus Elo, and pretty linear for small Elo differences. So, the strength in % (do you have a better definition?) is going even slower than logarithm. The strength change is at best (fastest) logarithmic in hardware and software.

Kai

For strength, I choose the measurement of number of chessboards intelligently condidered per second.

I don't know if it works for people. It works great for chess computers.
By 'intelligently' I also imply that we look at the important boards and discard examination of the stupid looking choices unless we really have to consider them.

I should add that the 'boards per second' is almost exclusively a function of hardware and 'intelligently' is almost exclusively a function of software.

If you want a measure for 'intelligently' {I admit it is rather ephemeral for a mathematical definition} I suggest the amount of boards examined divided by the amount of boards discarded, with a huge penalty for discarding the wrong ones and a huge penalty for examining the wrong ones.

[Laskos]

The strength increases exponentially due to hardware.
The strength increases exponentially due to software.

Logarithmically.

The Elo scale is logarithmic, but the increase in compute power and playing strength is exponential.

In the same way that a 9.0 earthquake is much larger than a 7.0 earthquake, an Elo of 2900 is tremendously larger than an Elo of 2600.

Taking the log of one million does not make the million become smaller.
It just turns it into a smaller number that is easier for some to understand.

Take the strength as % and compare it to Elo, the curve is even flatter than linear for % versus Elo, and pretty linear for small Elo differences. So, the strength in % (do you have a better definition?) is going even slower than logarithm. The strength change is at best (fastest) logarithmic in hardware and software.

Kai

For strength, I choose the measurement of number of chessboards intelligently condidered per second.

I don't know if it works for people. It works great for chess computers.
By 'intelligently' I also imply that we look at the important boards and discard examination of the stupid looking choices unless we really have to consider them.

Sorry, this hermeneutic evades me, I simply consider strength as % taken from the adversary, 0% minimum, 100% maximum, 50% equal, with perfect centrosymmetry at 50% and slower than logarithmic in hardware and software, with the limiting pure logarithm at 50%.

Kai

[Dann Corbit]

The strength increases exponentially due to hardware.
The strength increases exponentially due to software.

Logarithmically.

The Elo scale is logarithmic, but the increase in compute power and playing strength is exponential.

In the same way that a 9.0 earthquake is much larger than a 7.0 earthquake, an Elo of 2900 is tremendously larger than an Elo of 2600.

Taking the log of one million does not make the million become smaller.
It just turns it into a smaller number that is easier for some to understand.

Take the strength as % and compare it to Elo, the curve is even flatter than linear for % versus Elo, and pretty linear for small Elo differences. So, the strength in % (do you have a better definition?) is going even slower than logarithm. The strength change is at best (fastest) logarithmic in hardware and software.

Kai

For strength, I choose the measurement of number of chessboards intelligently condidered per second.

I don't know if it works for people. It works great for chess computers.
By 'intelligently' I also imply that we look at the important boards and discard examination of the stupid looking choices unless we really have to consider them.

Sorry, this hermeneutic evades me, I simply consider strength as % taken from the adversary, 0% minimum, 100% maximum, 50% equal, perfectly asymmetric at 50% and slower than logarithmic in hardware and software, with the limiting pure logarithm at 50%.

Kai

If you measure the effort with mini-max, I think you will find that the measure is quite faulty. It will take millions of times more effort to win 95% of the points.