Author: Uri Blass
Date: 15:46:48 04/04/01
Go up one level in this thread
On April 04, 2001 at 17:24:50, Christophe Theron wrote: >On April 04, 2001 at 15:18:41, Chessfun wrote: > >>On April 04, 2001 at 12:52:57, Christophe Theron wrote: >> >>>On April 04, 2001 at 10:43:24, stuart taylor wrote: >>> >>>>On April 04, 2001 at 09:13:03, Jonas Cohonas wrote: >>>> >>>>>On April 04, 2001 at 09:00:51, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>On April 04, 2001 at 08:54:59, Aloisio Ponti Lopes wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>Bullet 1 minute/game matches on ERT: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Gambit Tiger 2 x Yace 0.99 76 x 24 >>>>>>>Gambit Tiger 2 x Crafty 18.1 66,5 x 33,5 >>>>>>>Gambit Tiger 2 x LG2000v2.9 90 x 10 !!!!! >>>>>>> >>>>>>>A. Ponti >>>>>> >>>>>>how about setting both engines to 'instant move' >>>>>>and then play a few thousands of games? >>>>> >>>>>Oh my god >>>> >>>>If Kramnik or Kasparov were playing at instant time, or even 1 minute per game, >>>>I think their level of play would be quite weak. >>>> I don't see the real need of concentrating on making programs to play 2-300 >>>>elo points higher on lightning speed than at longer controls, much more so than >>>>the way humans do it. >>>> I don't even see what the great fun is in testing it. It's a little bit >>>>interesting, but not all that much. I don't think it can be used to demonstrate >>>>the quality of the program. Maybe the contrary is true, as the longer timings >>>>are the interesting thing. >>>>S.Taylor >>> >>> >>> >>>When you get a new program I think it's quite natural to begin with fast time >>>controls, so you get an overview on a large number of games in a reasonnable >>>amount of time. >>> >>>Do you think Aloiso is going to stop now? I guess he is going to try longer time >>>controls. >>> >>>Fast time controls are also important because they are commonly used on the >>>chess servers. >>> >>>Another thing to consider is that game in one minute on a PIII-800 computer must >>>be something like game in 4 hours on the hardware of 10 years ago. >>> >>>If 10 years ago you or other chess enthusiasts were interested in games in 4 >>>hours, then I don't understand why you would regard game in 1 minute on today's >>>computers with such contempt. These games show probably an even better chess >>>level (because software has been vastly improved). >>> >>>And finally, you could complain if the program in question (Tiger) was only >>>specialized for fast time controls, but as you will see it is not. >>> >>> >>> >>> Christophe >> >> >>I'm not sure that you can compare exactly as all programs behave differently >>especially such fast lightning games. I would think a lot of it depends on >>pruning especially at such fast speeds. >> >>Currently I have been running a 15 engine 1 min 1 sec inc Lightning >>tournament all play all 80 games each, 8400 games total, this is autoplayed >>and has been running now for about 10 days and currently Tiger leads Gambit >>by about 5 with about a 20 point gap till the next engine, Nimzo 7.32 is in >>last and the Shredder's have yet to play. All programs using their original >>opening books except crafty which is using general.ctg. All 5 men tablebases >>to programs that use them. >> >>While I agree both Tiger's are also very strong at longer controls currently >>with the results I have, most matches are being won by say 50-30. At longer >>controls while my results were very good they weren't this impressive. > > >It can be an effect of the so-called "dimishing returns" in computer chess. > >The effect has not been demonstrated yet, so it is still speculation, but many >people expect more computing power (or time to compute) to give less and less >strength increase. > >If it is true, the consequence is that at longer time controls the strength >differences between programs tend to be less and less perceptible. No This consequence is not result of diminishing returns. Suppose the following table for program A and B(the numbers are the rating of programs A and B on different speeds) speed 1 A 2200 B 2250 speed 2 A 2300 B 2360 speed 4 A 2390 B 2460 speed 8 A 2470 B 2550 speed 16 A 2540 B 2630 speed 32 A 2600 B 2700 This table suggests diminishing return for both A and B when the difference becomes bigger on faster hardware or at slower time control. Uri
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.