not to put too fine a point on it, but "estimating dan ranks" via
9x9 games is a bit silly. it doesn't actually capture any extra
information about the program, since there's no such thing as
a 9x9 rank to compare with/against, much less a dan rank.
ELO works well because it's strictly arbitrary relative to the
anchor. human kyu/dan ranks are arbitrary as well, but there
are thousands of people feeding ELO (or something like it) in
and out of the system, and there's an easily measured "top end".
i'm just saying, it will look a bit silly -- imagine if when chess
programs started to completely dominate something like 5x5 chess,
the strongest programs were labeled "master level play".
well, sure, at 5x5 chess...
there's a reason that KGS won't assign a rank to a player that
only plays 9x9 games. the rating system isn't really built for
a board that small, in the sense that handicaps are massively
nonlinear at that size. the main motivation for kyu/dan rankings
is to establish handicap stones, after all...
s.
____________________________________________________________________________________
Looking for last minute shopping deals?
Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.
http://tools.search.yahoo.com/newsearch/category.php?category=shopping
_______________________________________________
computer-go mailing list
computer-go@computer-go.org
http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
