Author: Keith Hyams
Date: 02:07:17 01/26/06
Go up one level in this thread
On January 26, 2006 at 01:59:48, Kurt Utzinger wrote:
>Has anybody ever seen better overall scores with the many
>Rybka beta's compared with the first Rybka 1.0 Beta 32-bit.
>[http://www.husvankempen.de/nunn/cegtrating4040best.html#4]
>[http://www.utzingerk.com/rybka10beta_test.htm]
>I can't remember and am therefore asking if we can indeed
>speak of any progress (apart from reducing number of bugs).
>It would be a pleasure to see a list with some hundred games
>vs other engines (no dummy bullet 1m+1s and 3m+0s games)
>proving the contrary of my assumption.
>Best regards
>Kurt
If I play a bullet game between Rybka and another engine I obtain information
about which of the 2 engines has the more effective combined search and
evaluation to a search depth of 9 ply. If you play a time limit of 1 hour you
get the same information down to 12 ply.
In the time that you have taken to finish your single game, I have played 40
games testing Rybka against 40 different engines with 40 different openings.
Please explain why this is a dummy thing to do. Please don't tell me that it is
because people can't play decent bullet chess because I know this. I also know
that my computer is not a human and so this is not a valid thing to say.
As you probably know, most of the releases of beta versions of Rybka were not
designed to increase strength. My opinion on the strength increase between the
original and beta 12 is that beta 12 is between 30 and 40 Elo stronger. This
opinion is not worth much because it is based on dummy games.
If I am correct about the increase in strength, then this change is quite
impressive. It has been achieved in about 8 weeks. Other authors of top-end
engines often achieve less than this in one year.
Regards
Keith
This page took 0.01 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.