1. Standard memberPhlabibit
    Mystic Meg
    tinyurl.com/3sbbwd4
    Joined
    27 Mar '03
    Moves
    17242
    16 Jul '08 21:181 edit
    Originally posted by Kepler
    As I recall, there were about 50 matches out of about 54 or 55 non-book moves. I removed another 5 as forced or obviously best. Altogether there were over 70 moves, 20 of which were book.
    Let me know where my math is wrong, but

    55 total evaluated moves, ~91% match means 5 moves were Not Engine

    remove 5 forced moves (engine matches)

    wouldn't you still have 5 Non engine moves out of 50? ( 90% )

    If you can give the numbers I'd like to see how this percentage could have gone from near 90 to near 80%

    Later folks!
  2. Standard memberKepler
    Demon Duck
    of Doom!
    Joined
    20 Aug '06
    Moves
    20099
    16 Jul '08 21:23
    Originally posted by Phlabibit
    Let me know where my math is wrong, but

    55 total evaluated moves, ~91% match means 5 moves were Not Engine

    remove 5 forced moves (engine matches)

    wouldn't you still have 5 Non engine moves out of 50? ( 90% )

    If you can give the numbers I'd like to see how this percentage could have gone from near 90 to near 80%

    Later folks!
    Hmmm, I have cocked that up somewhere. Let me see if i can find the details.
  3. Standard memberRagnorak
    For RHP addons...
    tinyurl.com/yssp6g
    Joined
    16 Mar '04
    Moves
    15013
    16 Jul '08 21:54
    Originally posted by Kepler
    I suggested that applying the system no1marauder was told to use to gather evidence against suspecte3d cheats to a correspondence chess master who could not have used an engine might provide evidence for or against such players playing like engines. Someone suggested I should do it and post the results so here they are. I have not put this in the original thr ...[text shortened]... y suspect he was making use of his own Hitech system.

    So, make of that what you will.
    Good work.

    A couple of thoughts...
    the top 12 engine choices will really affect the number of lines searched for each choice. I'd recommend 3-5, temporarily increasing that if you want further data.

    If anybody has Hitech, it'd be very interesting to see his matchup percentage with that engine.

    D
  4. Standard memberKepler
    Demon Duck
    of Doom!
    Joined
    20 Aug '06
    Moves
    20099
    16 Jul '08 22:04
    Originally posted by Ragnorak
    Good work.

    A couple of thoughts...
    the top 12 engine choices will really affect the number of lines searched for each choice. I'd recommend 3-5, temporarily increasing that if you want further data.

    If anybody has Hitech, it'd be very interesting to see his matchup percentage with that engine.

    D
    Fortunately HIARCS seems unaffected by the number of lines displayed. I experimented beforehand to make sure and the number of nodes searched per second and the speed of search doesn't change no matter how many lines are displayed. Fruit 2.3.1 is affected by number of lines displayed. I do not know if this also true on PCs since I am using a Mac.

    As far as I am aware Hitech is not only software but also dedicated hardware.
  5. Donation!~TONY~!
    1...c5!
    Your Kingside
    Joined
    28 Sep '01
    Moves
    40665
    16 Jul '08 22:381 edit
    I was giving some thought to this system of analysis recently when contemplating the future of the game mods (which in my opinion isn't coming back, sadly, but that's a different topic), and I've come to decide that this is a good system, but some extra mathy stuff might be useful to decide how useful the game is to look at. For instance, a game that's all theory, then a bunch of forced moves, then drawn is near useless, but will make both players look like cheats. Of course, you could look at it and tell, but it would be interesting to try to automate this process as much as possible. An interesting idea is to devise some kind of dimensionless quantity (forgive me, I've been too wrapped up in Fluid Mechanics, so I think in terms of dimensionless numbers all the time), possibly called the Rotella # (after the person who invented it of course), that's a measure of how many moves in a game required deep thought (out of the total N moves that aren't theoretical), or posed a problem to a player. The higher the Rotella # (Ro from now on) the more likely a high match up rate means something. This wouldn't be hard to implement. For instance,

    It wouldn't be too hard to take the top n move choices of an engine on a turn and see how much of a difference between the moves there are. You could set some threshold, let's just say .2 pawns, by which you count the m number of moves in this group that are within .2 pawns of the first choice. So each turn you'd have some fraction m/n that gives you a measure of how difficult it is to select the computers first choice. Then:

    Ro = [sum (m/n) ]/ N

    Thus a Ro of 1 would mean every turn was very difficult to select the computers first choice of moves, and a very small Ro would mean that the game means almost nothing. That said, Ro would depend heavily on n and the pawn fraction, but it would be interesting nonetheless.

    P.S. - Now that I think about it, we might have had this when I was a game mod, and I just didn't know what it was. Maybe not. I'll wait for someone to tell me. 😀
  6. Standard memberno1marauder
    Naturally Right
    Somewhere Else
    Joined
    22 Jun '04
    Moves
    42677
    16 Jul '08 22:52
    Originally posted by Kepler
    I suggested that applying the system no1marauder was told to use to gather evidence against suspecte3d cheats to a correspondence chess master who could not have used an engine might provide evidence for or against such players playing like engines. Someone suggested I should do it and post the results so here they are. I have not put this in the original thr ...[text shortened]... y suspect he was making use of his own Hitech system.

    So, make of that what you will.
    So perhaps the greatest correspondence player of all time playing a limited number of games averaged an 82% match up with a well-known engine.

    And there are players on this site playing dozens (or more) of games here, more on other sites and they have higher match up rates than Berliner. What does that tell you has to the probability that they are using engine assistance?
  7. Standard memberWulebgr
    Angler
    River City
    Joined
    08 Dec '04
    Moves
    16907
    16 Jul '08 23:24
    For what it's worth: I finally achieved a 100% match-up with an engine in Game 5222927!
  8. Standard membereldragonfly
    leperchaun messiah
    thru a glass onion
    Joined
    19 Apr '03
    Moves
    16870
    16 Jul '08 23:29
    Originally posted by no1marauder
    And there are players on this site playing dozens (or more) of games here, more on other sites and they have higher match up rates than Berliner. What does that tell you has to the probability that they are using engine assistance?
    Well it's obvious that it's practically certainteed that engines are being used.
  9. Joined
    19 Nov '05
    Moves
    3112
    16 Jul '08 23:361 edit
    Originally posted by eldragonfly
    Too simplistic, dull, arbitrary, basically worthless, not insightful in the least, etc.
    Your first post in this thread seemed logical and even insightful. I've had the same argument against relying completely on engine statistics. A forcing position is likely to have a higher matchup rate than a quiet one with many good choices and one should also account for opening theory. I was impressed. Oh well...
  10. Standard memberwormwood
    If Theres Hell Below
    We're All Gonna Go!
    Joined
    10 Sep '05
    Moves
    10228
    16 Jul '08 23:39
    Originally posted by Wulebgr
    For what it's worth: I finally achieved a 100% match-up with an engine in Game 5222927!
    ha! 🙂

    probably a principled but a couple of moves longer approach makes more sense than that fancy rook shuffle at the end though. 🙂 -btw, I just witnessed an IM on ICC moving pieces for a timeout win, instead of mating with the rook!?! and he did have the time, easy. crazy stuff.
  11. Standard membereldragonfly
    leperchaun messiah
    thru a glass onion
    Joined
    19 Apr '03
    Moves
    16870
    16 Jul '08 23:433 edits
    Originally posted by exigentsky
    Your first post in this thread seemed logical and even insightful. I've had the same argument against relying completely on engine statistics. A forcing position is likely to have a higher matchup rate than a quiet one with many good choices and one should also account for opening theory. I was impressed.
    How meaningful, i meant every word. But seriously between the poster in question and the rest of the now defunct/disbanded game mod team minus Mr. Tebb, it's not a stretch to realize how nothing got accomplished. and exigentsky i wasn't making an argument against "relying on engine statistics" no i was questioning the apparently rather arbitrary and haphazard methodology, leading to possible misuses and misinterpretations of simple numbers. Rhymes with orange.
  12. Joined
    19 Nov '05
    Moves
    3112
    16 Jul '08 23:47
    Originally posted by Wulebgr
    For what it's worth: I finally achieved a 100% match-up with an engine in Game 5222927!
    Too bad all my games don't start in that position. 😛
  13. Joined
    19 Nov '05
    Moves
    3112
    17 Jul '08 00:012 edits
    Originally posted by eldragonfly
    How meaningful, i meant every word. But seriously between the poster in question and the rest of the now defunct/disbanded game mod team minus Mr. Tebb, it's not a stretch to realize how nothing got accomplished. and exigentsky i wasn't making an argument against "relying on engine statistics" no i was questioning the apparently rather arbitrary and haph ...[text shortened]... y, leading to possible misuses and misinterpretations of simple numbers. Rhymes with orange.
    You wrote:

    Originally posted by eldragonfly
    believe your methodology perhaps might be severely flawed. Some moves are forced, some moves are common variations of well known openings. If you would post 1 game and give us the move by move breakdown, i think that would be helpful.

    This seems like a reasonable argument against relying "completely on engine statistics." That's all I claimed. For example, if we have a 30 move game and 20 moves are theory while the next few are forced and then result in a perpetual, that would have an extremely high matchup rate and still tell nothing. On the other hand, if we have a closed position with a multitude of good plans and one consistently matches with Fritz, this is an indication of cheating. Engine statistics should be used with care by someone qualified to understand when they're relevant.

    BTW: Apple(s) don't rhyme with orange. I'm confused.
  14. Standard membereldragonfly
    leperchaun messiah
    thru a glass onion
    Joined
    19 Apr '03
    Moves
    16870
    17 Jul '08 00:02
    Originally posted by !~TONY~!
    For instance, a game that's all theory, then a bunch of forced moves, then drawn is near useless, but will make both players look like cheats.
    What specious drivel and worthless speculation, i almost feel sorry for you..
  15. Standard membereldragonfly
    leperchaun messiah
    thru a glass onion
    Joined
    19 Apr '03
    Moves
    16870
    17 Jul '08 00:051 edit
    Originally posted by exigentsky
    This seems like a reasonable argument against relying "completely on engine statistics." That's all I claimed.
    Well your interpretation is just plain wrong then. i was questioning the poorly described ideas of :

    1) determining when an opening "goes out of book"

    and

    2) were they looking at forced moves or not.

    That is all.

    "For example, if we have a 30 move game and 20 moves are theory while the next few are forced and then result in a perpetual, that would have an extremely high matchup rate and still tell nothing."

    i agree with this, but again i still don't see me debunking engine matchup rates. And seriously the matchup rates might not be as high as you imply them to be here.
Back to Top

Cookies help us deliver our Services. By using our Services or clicking I agree, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn More.I Agree