Maybe this helps:
Played with 4pc SYZYGY bases.
Pondering Kg2, which is played in 0s out of the Tablebases and SF151031 is gone. CPU usage 0%.
I suspect some UCI problem as the GUI is crashed as well (which doesnt happen (that often) with the latest other engines I tested).
Regards
Ingo
Curiosity Engine ??? (For Now It's Number 1 )
Moderators: hgm, Rebel, chrisw
-
- Posts: 1539
- Joined: Thu Mar 09, 2006 2:02 pm
-
- Posts: 2801
- Joined: Mon Feb 11, 2008 3:53 pm
- Location: Denmark
- Full name: Damir Desevac
Re: Curiosity Engine ??? (For Now It's Number 1 )
Hi Ingo
Maybe it is the engine name that the GUI can not handle....
Maybe it is the engine name that the GUI can not handle....
-
- Posts: 1535
- Joined: Sun Oct 25, 2009 2:30 am
Re: Curiosity Engine ??? (For Now It's Number 1 )
Ponder ON=real chessIWB wrote:I don't know if it happens in the chess sub group of Ponder OFF games … but as nearly no one tests real chess - shit might happen …
Ponder OFF=unreal chess?
-
- Posts: 1539
- Joined: Thu Mar 09, 2006 2:02 pm
Re: Curiosity Engine ??? (For Now It's Number 1 )
I don't mind the name. I am open for suggestions to distinguish the to types of the game.Ozymandias wrote:Ponder ON=real chessIWB wrote:I don't know if it happens in the chess sub group of Ponder OFF games … but as nearly no one tests real chess - shit might happen …
Ponder OFF=unreal chess?
Ingo
-
- Posts: 658
- Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 8:58 pm
Re: Curiosity Engine ??? (For Now It's Number 1 )
Real chess is usually played with ponder on.Ponder ON=real chess
Ponder OFF=unreal chess?
Good plyers have the game in their mind and still think when it's not their turn.
Kind regards
Bernhard
-
- Posts: 812
- Joined: Tue Jun 16, 2009 10:09 am
- Location: Spain
Re: Curiosity Engine ??? (For Now It's Number 1 )
Ponder ON=since engines has no psychological capabilities, no foresight, ponder on only introduces some degree of random bias. It has no sense to emulate human conditions, engines aren't humans.IWB wrote:I don't mind the name. I am open for suggestions to distinguish the to types of the game.Ozymandias wrote:Ponder ON=real chessIWB wrote:I don't know if it happens in the chess sub group of Ponder OFF games … but as nearly no one tests real chess - shit might happen …
Ponder OFF=unreal chess?
Ingo
Ponder OFF=a more precise and reproductible way of testing engines
Is my honest opinion.
This not mean Ingo work are invalid, but I think it would be more precise with ponder off, even with the same number of games (ponder off allow to play twice number of games for the same period of time, hence more accurate results).
-
- Posts: 1535
- Joined: Sun Oct 25, 2009 2:30 am
Re: Curiosity Engine ??? (For Now It's Number 1 )
I was hoping for some kind of insight, into Ponder ON testing. What you say is basically what I thought, but maybe extensive testing has revealed, that some engines benefit more than others, because they guess the move played more often. It'd be interesting to see those stats.Aser Huerga wrote:Ponder ON=since engines has no psychological capabilities, no foresight, ponder on only introduces some degree of random bias. It has no sense to emulate human conditions, engines aren't humans.
Ponder OFF=a more precise and reproductible way of testing engines
Is my honest opinion.
This not mean Ingo work are invalid, but I think it would be more precise with ponder off, even with the same number of games (ponder off allow to play twice number of games for the same period of time, hence more accurate results).
-
- Posts: 1539
- Joined: Thu Mar 09, 2006 2:02 pm
Re: Curiosity Engine ??? (For Now It's Number 1 )
Just some gut feeling watching the games:
The opponents answer has to come imediatley (which means the opponent has to use TBs as well) and the number of pieces has to be very low, probaly within the number of pieces used for the Tbs (in my case 4 or below).
And worst: Even then it is not always crashing
Bye
Ingo
The opponents answer has to come imediatley (which means the opponent has to use TBs as well) and the number of pieces has to be very low, probaly within the number of pieces used for the Tbs (in my case 4 or below).
And worst: Even then it is not always crashing
Bye
Ingo
-
- Posts: 5566
- Joined: Tue Feb 28, 2012 11:56 pm
Re: Curiosity Engine ??? (For Now It's Number 1 )
PERHAPS Stockfish crashes if it reaches maximum depth while pondering (i.e. maximum number of iterations). I did not test this.IWB wrote:Just some gut feeling watching the games:
The opponents answer has to come imediatley (which means the opponent has to use TBs as well) and the number of pieces has to be very low, probaly within the number of pieces used for the Tbs (in my case 4 or below).
And worst: Even then it is not always crashing
-
- Posts: 1539
- Joined: Thu Mar 09, 2006 2:02 pm
Re: Curiosity Engine ??? (For Now It's Number 1 )
Don't know, 127 plys in the below case, but only 70 in the example before, but there it was only 3 pieces ... I don't knowsyzygy wrote: PERHAPS Stockfish crashes if it reaches maximum depth while pondering (i.e. maximum number of iterations). I did not test this.
But it is not the related to a low number of pieces on the board:
Bye
Ingo