Page 1 of 5

Have we hit a wall on chess software after Rybka 4 came out?

Posted: Wed Jun 09, 2010 11:52 pm
by jplchess
After Rybka 4 came out have we hit a WALL concerning software with tactics and postition? This excludes the opening library, endgame tablebases, and hardware. If there is room for improvement, then what would it be besides closed games?

I was a big fan of Mephisto Genius when it came out 17 years ago. The executable was 54,313 bytes for version number 2. That one was a senior master at the time and a grandmaster in tactics.

I am also a big fan of Fischer Random because obviously the opening library is very limited.

Please make some constructive posts. :idea:

Re: Have we hit a wall on chess software after Rybka 4 came

Posted: Wed Jun 09, 2010 11:57 pm
by Graham Banks
The horizon effect is still a problem, but I guess it will remain so for a long time to come.
Therefore, further development of long term planning could be a goal?
I'm not a programmer though.

Re: Have we hit a wall on chess software after Rybka 4 came

Posted: Wed Jun 09, 2010 11:58 pm
by Albert Silver
jplchess wrote:After Rybka 4 came out have we hit a WALL concerning software with tactics and postition? This excludes the opening library, endgame tablebases, and hardware. If there is room for improvement, then what would it be besides closed games?

I was a big fan of Mephisto Genius when it came out 17 years ago. The executable was 54,313 bytes for version number 2. That one was a senior master at the time and a grandmaster in tactics.

I am also a big fan of Fischer Random because obviously the opening library is very limited.

Please make some constructive posts. :idea:
We haven't hit a wall, not by a fair margin. Rybka 4 displays numerous weaknesses still IMHO, whether in the opening/middlegame, to the endgame.

Re: Have we hit a wall on chess software after Rybka 4 came

Posted: Thu Jun 10, 2010 3:24 am
by Nimzovik
Of course the wall has not been hit . Just ask Pablo :wink:

Re: Have we hit a wall on chess software after Rybka 4 came

Posted: Thu Jun 10, 2010 3:28 am
by Albert Silver
Nimzovik wrote:Of course the wall has not been hit . Just ask Pablo :wink:
I don't know. It looks like a wall to me...

[D]1r6/r7/2bkp3/1p1p1p1p/p1pP1PpP/P1P1P1B1/1PK4P/1N1B4 b - - 0 150[D]

:lol:

Re: Have we hit a wall on chess software after Rybka 4 came

Posted: Thu Jun 10, 2010 8:14 am
by Bill Rogers
You think that we hit a wall? Let me ask you who was number one before Rybka, number two? As long as there are chess programmers there will be the possibliity of someone improving the game. In my opinion only when chess has been somewhat solbed will we come close to a wall.
Every time someone creates a new super program many people seem to think it is the last and greatest only to have someone else make a better one.
Bill

Re: Have we hit a wall on chess software after Rybka 4 came

Posted: Thu Jun 10, 2010 4:38 pm
by swami
jplchess wrote:After Rybka 4 came out have we hit a WALL concerning software with tactics and postition?
No, there still appears that there's a lot to improve upon, I'd guess.

Engines are not perfect at strategy I can assure you, because I have gone through validating 2000 positions for STS. It's toughest to evaluate the position. Strategy is what prevents computers from permanently solving chess, if there's ever such a thing. It's way too deep.

Engines are near perfect in dynamic tactics.

Re: Have we hit a wall on chess software after Rybka 4 came

Posted: Fri Jun 11, 2010 9:40 am
by Eastendboy
swami wrote: Engines are near perfect in dynamic tactics.
Until a human with free time and a time control of 10 moves in 40 days comes along and improves on perfection. :wink:

Re: Have we hit a wall on chess software after Rybka 4 came

Posted: Fri Jun 11, 2010 11:37 am
by Robert Flesher
swami wrote:
jplchess wrote:After Rybka 4 came out have we hit a WALL concerning software with tactics and postition?
No, there still appears that there's a lot to improve upon, I'd guess.

Engines are not perfect at strategy I can assure you, because I have gone through validating 2000 positions for STS. It's toughest to evaluate the position. Strategy is what prevents computers from permanently solving chess, if there's ever such a thing. It's way too deep.

Engines are near perfect in dynamic tactics.

I say not even close to pefect, but far better than fleshlings, like me and you :P

Re: Have we hit a wall on chess software after Rybka 4 came

Posted: Sat Jun 12, 2010 5:03 am
by M ANSARI
A lot of things can still be improved upon. R4 is obviously a Rybka with some stuff omitted to preserve some secrets, so we really don't know how far the engine has progressed. But I think better usage of hardware will improve engines by quite a bit. If you play an engine against itself with a time handicap, you will find that it can score much better with more time. Some new technologies such as Monte Carlo might come into effect in real time. Or maybe an End Game module. With more and more cores also being available on a simple home PC, the engines will start acting like clusters and will have cores to look at mundane things or dramatic sacs that would otherwise have been pruned. I think there is at least a good 200 to 300 ELO left before we start reaching a level of no more improvements ... at least at LTC's.