Page 1 of 2

Engine Style

Posted: Mon Jun 04, 2007 3:13 pm
by maxchgr
Hi all
engine elo is commonly being tested and compared but I wanted to know if anyone has any useful information/observations regarding various engine styles, and perhaps any engines that are particularly good for analysis of one's games for 'intereseting' possibilities in a human game.

im interested in understanding differences between engines like


thanks a lot guys for any responses
this topic is really interesting to me!

Re: Engine Style

Posted: Tue Jun 05, 2007 1:57 am
by maxchgr
Is this topic not interesting to anyone else? :o

Re: Engine Style

Posted: Tue Jun 05, 2007 5:20 am
by Kirill Kryukov
In CCRL study we are trying to compare playing styles of different engines by computing ponder hit and evaluation difference values. It is done automatically for all games in our database that have necessary information. Note that while we are able to define and measure the similarity or difference between styles of two engines, we are not yet close to understanding it. :-)

Correlation page in CCRL 40/40
Correlation page in CCRL 40/4

Also you can construct ponder hit and eval diff tables for any custom set of engines if you use "Custom comparison" section on the main page (CCRL 40/40 main page, CCRL 40/4 main page).


Re: Engine Style

Posted: Tue Jun 05, 2007 6:47 am
by maxchgr
Hmm thats quite interesting.
Thanks krill :o

does anyone have a subjective opinion on styles of the engines?

Re: Engine Style

Posted: Tue Jun 05, 2007 7:37 am
by Marek Soszynski
Here are my comments on various engines' styles. Be advised that my comments are highly subjective albeit based on extensive usage. I expect disagreement.
  • Fritz - very strong and suitably aggressive in all phases
  • Hiarcs - extremely strong, often appears to play according to a plan, which gives it a human-like feel
  • Junior - its relative strength and gambit/sacrificial style of play is not what it was
  • Ktulu - gives a good impression of strategical play, but only a medium strength engine overall
  • Loop - extremely strong, particularly aggressive in the opening
  • Rybka - conservative in the opening, without equal in the middlegame when in a dozen or so moves it can turn an inferior position into a superior one, even against top engines, through subtle manoeuvring and super-accurate piece placement
  • Shredder - very classical, orthodox play, still probably the best endgame engine

Re: Engine Style

Posted: Tue Jun 05, 2007 4:33 pm
by maxchgr
Thank you marek, thats exactly the type of response I was interested in reading. It's subjective but style can't be quantified, can it? ... :)

Does anyone else have anything to say on the matter?

(btw regarding junior, I agree, it doesn't strike me as particularly sacrificial or speculatively interesting as it used to be compared to fritz for example, which saddens me =] Is it version 6 that was the most interesting in that regard?)

Re: Engine Style

Posted: Tue Jun 05, 2007 4:51 pm
by Dr.Wael Deeb
Hi Maksim,
To know well the engine style,the best way is to play against it along with observing it playing against the other engines....
Now regarding Junior,the most spectacular version in my opinion is Deep Junior 7 :!:

Re: Engine Style

Posted: Tue Jun 05, 2007 7:46 pm
by gerold
maxchgr wrote:Is this topic not interesting to anyone else? :o
I think Deep Junior 10 is the best for learning chess attack
Watch its sacrifice attack style.

Go Junior,


Re: Engine Style

Posted: Tue Jun 05, 2007 8:08 pm
by cooldalek
gerold and Marek seem to have different views on Junior 10.

Anyone want to add a third opinion?

Is it still "speculative"?

I am toying with buying it

Re: Engine Style

Posted: Wed Jun 06, 2007 12:35 am
by maxchgr
From what I've seen it is no more aggressive than Fritz 10, I was wondering if thats an unpopular concencus