(deriving such a model does not seem trivial, perhaps a simulation would do)
On 7/6/07, Joseph Heled <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Ok, one would have to derive the confidence interval given all
probabilities and N=1000. perhaps I will do it later (assuming I can
figure it out), or maybe someone els
Ok, one would have to derive the confidence interval given all
probabilities and N=1000. perhaps I will do it later (assuming I can
figure it out), or maybe someone else can.
On 7/6/07, Achim Mueller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
* Joseph Heled <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [070705 23:51]:
> I am not sure wh
* Joseph Heled <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [070705 23:51]:
> I am not sure what you try to show here, but if we can't show that
> gnubg is individually better than bgb or sn, the likelihood it is
> better than both is still harder to show
Then in other words: you talk about the likelihood of _one_ bot bei
I am not sure what you try to show here, but if we can't show that
gnubg is individually better than bgb or sn, the likelihood it is
better than both is still harder to show
On 7/6/07, Achim Mueller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
* Joseph Heled <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [070705 14:25]:
> Standard error ma
* Joseph Heled <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [070705 14:25]:
> Standard error may be informative, but statistical importance matters
> more to me. I think it is clear you tell gnubg is better than Jelly
> from those number, but nothing more.
Well, I wrote a lot of nonsense today (my statistic lessons are 20
Standard error may be informative, but statistical importance matters
more to me. I think it is clear you tell gnubg is better than Jelly
from those number, but nothing more.
On 7/6/07, Achim Mueller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
* Joseph Heled <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [070705 12:41]:
> Even if gnubg wi
* Joseph Heled <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [070705 12:41]:
> Even if gnubg wins a match only 49.5%, in a set of 1000 matches there
> is more than 5% chance that gnubg wins 519 of them. that what 95% (one
> sided) confidence interval means.
I guess I got it now. I probably was mislead by an article of Chuc
Even if gnubg wins a match only 49.5%, in a set of 1000 matches there
is more than 5% chance that gnubg wins 519 of them. that what 95% (one
sided) confidence interval means.
-Joseph
On 7/5/07, Achim Mueller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
* Joseph Heled <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [070705 11:14]:
> With gn
* Joseph Heled <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [070705 11:14]:
> With gnubg/Jelly we have p = .593 (estimated win percentage) and N =
> 1000. The 95% confidence interval is [.562,.623], so we can be sure
> gnubg is better.
>
> gnubg/bgb p=.519 and the interval is [.487,.55] so you can't say gnubg
> is better
With gnubg/Jelly we have p = .593 (estimated win percentage) and N =
1000. The 95% confidence interval is [.562,.623], so we can be sure
gnubg is better.
gnubg/bgb p=.519 and the interval is [.487,.55] so you can't say gnubg
is better than any of the others.
with p around 52% percent and 10,000
* Øystein Johansen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [070705 09:23]:
> Achim Mueller wrote:
> >>From GammonU:
> >
> > BGBJellyfish Snowie 4.5 GnuBG 0.14
> > BGB -534504 481
> > Jellyfish466- 428 407
> > Snowie 4.5 496 572
> On Behalf Of Joseph Heled
>
> Or loses to them all. Who did those runs?
>
BGBJellyfish Snowie 4.5 GnuBG 0.14
BGB -534504 481
Jellyfish466- 428 407
Snowie 4.5 496 572 - 489
GnuBG 0.14 5
Or loses to them all. Who did those runs?
On 7/5/07, Øystein Johansen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Achim Mueller wrote:
>>From GammonU:
>
> BGBJellyfish Snowie 4.5 GnuBG 0.14
> BGB -534504 481
> Jellyfish466- 428 40
Achim Mueller wrote:
>>From GammonU:
>
> BGBJellyfish Snowie 4.5 GnuBG 0.14
> BGB -534504 481
> Jellyfish466- 428 407
> Snowie 4.5 496 572 - 489
> GnuBG 0.14 519 593511
14 matches
Mail list logo
