[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Bug-gnubg] Default met

From: Achim Mueller
Subject: Re: [Bug-gnubg] Default met
Date: Wed, 4 Jul 2007 09:10:27 +0200
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.9i

* Joseph Heled <address@hidden> [070704 08:57]:
> On 7/4/07, Achim Mueller <address@hidden> wrote:
> >Frank Berger made an announcement at gammonu and bgonline.org that
> >someone made a simulation of 1000 25p matches with gnubg, snowie bgblitz
> >and jellyfish. Results will be published today.
> >
> >I'm not sure whether he described correctly, how the gnubg setup setup
> >was, but it might be that gnubg has used zadeh met as default.
> >
> >For this is the worst met of all - I estimated at least 2% worse than
> >snowie met - my suggestion is to use either g11 or mec26 as default met.
> >
> While I totally agree the default should be at least mec26, It is hard
> to believe 2%. where did you get this figure?

I made a long simulation of snowie.met vs woolsey met 10,000 5p matches,
it was 51.7% - 48.3%. A smaller simulation of snowie.met vs. zadeh.met
(1,000 matches) showed 52.4% - 47.6%. I agree that this sample isn't big
enough, but it was big enough for not trusting zadeh.met anymore.

Didn't you also make a _very_ long simulation comparing mets?



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]