On Thu, Aug 4, 2011 at 5:37 PM, Vlad Dumitrescu <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 4, 2011 at 23:12, David Fotland <[email protected]> > wrote: > > I often see that one side gets lucky early and over a few hundred games > the > > win rate moves back toward what I expected. Small numbers of games (like > a > > few hundred) can be very misleading. > > Great, thanks. This means then that 1000 games can only detect a > change of at least 50 ELO. > Of course it's a matter of how much certainty you want. If your results show only 2 or 3 ELO, you need tens of thousands of games to give high confidence that there is an actual improvement. However if your results show 50 ELO, I believe the error margins after 1000 games is more than enough to "prove" that some of this 50 ELO is real. Of course it may all be real, but you can only assume that some of it is. Don > /Vlad > _______________________________________________ > Computer-go mailing list > [email protected] > http://dvandva.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/computer-go >
_______________________________________________ Computer-go mailing list [email protected] http://dvandva.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/computer-go
