I What would the pdf look like for 'N' chess computers with the same rating

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the implications of having 'N' identical chess computers with the same rating play against each other infinitely. Participants question whether the computers are reset before each game or if they learn from experience, affecting their ratings. It is suggested that if the computers are identical and do not update their settings, their ratings would converge to a uniform distribution. However, if they learn and adjust their strategies, the ratings might trend towards a normal distribution due to the central limit theorem. The conversation highlights the complexities of rating systems like ELO and how they might behave under these conditions.
iVenky
Messages
212
Reaction score
12
If we have 'N' advanced computers (where N-> infinity) each with exactly the same rating to begin with and make them play with each other for an infinite number of games, what would the shape of the probability density function of the ratings eventually look like?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Are they reset to the same factory setting before each game?
 
I find this an interesting question partially because it is rather vaguely worded. For instance are the computers identical? If not how can their ratings be exactly the same? If not how does one quantify this? Would the result depend upon the tournament rules?
I guess that in the proposed infinite limit the ratings would end up the same and equal..
 
  • Like
Likes iVenky
Keith_McClary said:
Are they reset to the same factory setting before each game?
You mean the ratings?
 
hutchphd said:
I find this an interesting question partially because it is rather vaguely worded. For instance are the computers identical? If not how can their ratings be exactly the same? If not how does one quantify this? Would the result depend upon the tournament rules?
I guess that in the proposed infinite limit the ratings would end up the same and equal..
Yes, it was a shower thought. The computers are exactly identical. So you mean it would be a uniform distribution?
 
iVenky said:
You mean the ratings?
I mean the computers. Are they reset before each game? Or perhaps they are AIs that learn from experience?
 
  • Like
Likes iVenky
Keith_McClary said:
I mean the computers. Are they reset before each game? Or perhaps they are AIs that learn from experience?

Ah , I see, that's an interesting question that I didn't think of. Let's consider both.

1) If computers don't update their neural settings after every game
2) If computers learn after each game and update their settings.
 
Given identical digital computers with identical software and barring any hardware glitches. They should by definition act in the same way.

The only variation would be when each started to process a task. If they used their clock to initialize any random seed generators then they could wildly vary in how they compute some probabilistic spread due solely to the random seed generator and anything that depended on the generator as well.
 
By the central limit theorem, normal.
 
  • Like
Likes iVenky
  • #10
Deepmind, to my knowledge, has not published data on the millions of training games played by AlphaZero - that would be an interesting real life example. Do not need separate computers, can do these games within the same software.

But this would not be the same as the identical version of Stockfish playing itself, where I would guess the outcomes are set, as the program is not 'learning' as Deepmind does
 
  • Like
Likes iVenky
  • #11
pbuk said:
By the central limit theorem, normal.

That's what I am not sure of, if it would be normal or uniform.
 
  • #12
I think by the central limit theorem the distribution of ratings would trend (as N gets very large) to an ever sharper spike at the initial exactly similar rating.
I realize I don't really know how the rating is assigned so this may be incorrect (but the central limit trend is true for some reasonable measure).
So perhaps this is not so interesting after all!
 
  • #13
iVenky said:
That's what I am not sure of, if it would be normal or uniform.
Uniform within what range? How would you account for the discontinuities at the bounds of that range?
 
  • Like
Likes hutchphd
  • #14
As ELO measures wins in zero sum games, ignoring draws and white vs black , the distribution of wins for identically skilled chess players would look like fair coin flips, so what is the distribution of ELOs for an infinite number of coin flippers?
 
  • #15
BWV said:
As ELO measures wins in zero sum games, ignoring draws and white vs black , the distribution of wins for identically skilled chess players would look like fair coin flips, so what is the distribution of ELOs for an infinite number of coin flippers?

I think elo rewards the lower rated person more points for winning than it takes away when they lose, so it's a random walk that drifts back towards the starting point.
 
  • #16
iVenky said:
So you mean it would be a uniform distribution?
What do mean by "it"? Define the random variable ( random vector?) that you are asking about.

Are you asking about a vector representing the ratings of each machine as a sequence of round robin tournaments proceeds? A uniform distribution on such vectors would imply that a vector of ratings that were "highly unequal" would have the same probability as a vector of ratings that were all equal.
 
  • #17
Stephen Tashi said:
What do mean by "it"? Define the random variable ( random vector?) that you are asking about.

Are you asking about a vector representing the ratings of each machine as a sequence of round robin tournaments proceeds? A uniform distribution on such vectors would imply that a vector of ratings that were "highly unequal" would have the same probability as a vector of ratings that were all equal.

I mean the ratings of the computers
 
Back
Top