* Joseph Heled <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [070704 08:57]: > On 7/4/07, Achim Mueller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 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? Ciao Achim _______________________________________________ Bug-gnubg mailing list Bug-gnubg@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-gnubg
