31-05-2013, 09:40 PM
Andrew,
After playing around with various key words Google came up what is essentially a peer reviewed document on forensic DNA testing
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://ota.fas.org/reports/9021.pdf">http://ota.fas.org/reports/9021.pdf</a><!-- m -->
OTA = Office of Technology Assessment.
An american outfit, presumably government sponsored.
Rather a long document: most pertinent pages for the DNA forensics question I raised are 67 and 68.
Basically conclusion is rather surprisingly that the question has not been answered yet.
Key quote from page 67 is " these basic calculations are only valid when applied to populations in which the DNA fragments are statistically independent"
Actually I do suspect that Ivanov is guilty but if this goes to court his lawyer could claim that his client used Houdini to train himself and for that reason (more frequently than for other players of his standard) his moves tend to match those of Houdini.
And furthermore you stated that Magnus Carlson produces fewer match ups with Houdini. I put it to you the jury that that Carlson does not use Houdini in the same manner as my client. Therefore I put it to you that the comparison with the world champion is not valid .... Answer Yes or No to the Court.
The obvious action required here is of course to to ban live broadcasts of games and feed in a delay of 10 minutes or more.
The analogy between lottery stats chess moves stats is an interesting one.
Genetics defines my family.
Chessmoves are my friends.
As the saying goes you can choose your friends but not your family. =)
After playing around with various key words Google came up what is essentially a peer reviewed document on forensic DNA testing
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://ota.fas.org/reports/9021.pdf">http://ota.fas.org/reports/9021.pdf</a><!-- m -->
OTA = Office of Technology Assessment.
An american outfit, presumably government sponsored.
Rather a long document: most pertinent pages for the DNA forensics question I raised are 67 and 68.
Basically conclusion is rather surprisingly that the question has not been answered yet.
Key quote from page 67 is " these basic calculations are only valid when applied to populations in which the DNA fragments are statistically independent"
Actually I do suspect that Ivanov is guilty but if this goes to court his lawyer could claim that his client used Houdini to train himself and for that reason (more frequently than for other players of his standard) his moves tend to match those of Houdini.
And furthermore you stated that Magnus Carlson produces fewer match ups with Houdini. I put it to you the jury that that Carlson does not use Houdini in the same manner as my client. Therefore I put it to you that the comparison with the world champion is not valid .... Answer Yes or No to the Court.
The obvious action required here is of course to to ban live broadcasts of games and feed in a delay of 10 minutes or more.
The analogy between lottery stats chess moves stats is an interesting one.
Genetics defines my family.
Chessmoves are my friends.
As the saying goes you can choose your friends but not your family. =)