Latest patch to SF looks very promising

[Dann Corbit]

It is twice as good at what they call "long time control" compared to the fast time control. (about 7% improvement verses 3.5% improvement.)

Hence, when it moves to real time control (e.g. analyzing games or positions) I think it may be really excellent.

The idea is simple and so other chess engines may also benefit. If you are an author, I suggest you examine "Tweak statScore condition" by GuardianRM.

[Norm Pollock]

Hi Dann,

Is this in anyway connected to SugaR xpro 1.2?

I mention this because it does appear likely to me that Sugar xpro 1.2 is stronger that either the previous 9/17/17 version of SF or the 8/25/17 version of asmfish.

If not, would you know what kind of patch or patches SugaR is using to make it possibly stronger than its source?

-Norm

[Dann Corbit]

Hi Dann,

Is this in anyway connected to SugaR xpro 1.2?

I mention this because it does appear likely to me that Sugar xpro 1.2 is stronger that either the previous 9/17/17 version of SF or the 8/25/17 version of asmfish.

If not, would you know what kind of patch or patches SugaR is using to make it possibly stronger than its source?

-Norm

That patch was not in Sugar, so I added it for my own copy of it.

There are lots of differences for Sugar, and not just the copyright headers. It's a real fork, and not one of those phony tweak things.

[Lyudmil Tsvetkov]

Hi Dann,

Is this in anyway connected to SugaR xpro 1.2?

I mention this because it does appear likely to me that Sugar xpro 1.2 is stronger that either the previous 9/17/17 version of SF or the 8/25/17 version of asmfish.

If not, would you know what kind of patch or patches SugaR is using to make it possibly stronger than its source?

-Norm

That patch was not in Sugar, so I added it for my own copy of it.

There are lots of differences for Sugar, and not just the copyright headers. It's a real fork, and not one of those phony tweak things.

but nothing original functionally related.

[Dann Corbit]

Hi Dann,

Is this in anyway connected to SugaR xpro 1.2?

I mention this because it does appear likely to me that Sugar xpro 1.2 is stronger that either the previous 9/17/17 version of SF or the 8/25/17 version of asmfish.

If not, would you know what kind of patch or patches SugaR is using to make it possibly stronger than its source?

-Norm

That patch was not in Sugar, so I added it for my own copy of it.

There are lots of differences for Sugar, and not just the copyright headers. It's a real fork, and not one of those phony tweak things.

but nothing original functionally related.

And yet, the earth does move.

[Lyudmil Tsvetkov]

It is twice as good at what they call "long time control" compared to the fast time control. (about 7% improvement verses 3.5% improvement.)

Hence, when it moves to real time control (e.g. analyzing games or positions) I think it may be really excellent.

The idea is simple and so other chess engines may also benefit. If you are an author, I suggest you examine "Tweak statScore condition" by GuardianRM.

SF seems to be in a deadlock currently.

Huge hardware power, twice as many tests as in the past, and yet an incredible amount of reds and very few substantial patches.

I guess SF is simply over-tweaked and they don't know how to detweak it in order for new functional patches to start working again.

[Dann Corbit]

It is twice as good at what they call "long time control" compared to the fast time control. (about 7% improvement verses 3.5% improvement.)

Hence, when it moves to real time control (e.g. analyzing games or positions) I think it may be really excellent.

The idea is simple and so other chess engines may also benefit. If you are an author, I suggest you examine "Tweak statScore condition" by GuardianRM.

SF seems to be in a deadlock currently.

Huge hardware power, twice as many tests as in the past, and yet an incredible amount of reds and very few substantial patches.

I guess SF is simply over-tweaked and they don't know how to detweak it in order for new functional patches to start working again.

There was some bad patch between June and August:
http://www.sp-cc.de/

And nobody has bothered to repair it. I guess if the Sugar code left that patch out, it could easily explain the big strength difference.

It is possible that the introduction of a new book explains the dive, but all the programs in the tournaments use the book, so I doubt it.

[Eelco de Groot]

It is twice as good at what they call "long time control" compared to the fast time control. (about 7% improvement verses 3.5% improvement.)

Hence, when it moves to real time control (e.g. analyzing games or positions) I think it may be really excellent.

The idea is simple and so other chess engines may also benefit. If you are an author, I suggest you examine "Tweak statScore condition" by GuardianRM.

SF seems to be in a deadlock currently.

Huge hardware power, twice as many tests as in the past, and yet an incredible amount of reds and very few substantial patches.

I guess SF is simply over-tweaked and they don't know how to detweak it in order for new functional patches to start working again.

There was some bad patch between June and August:
http://www.sp-cc.de/

And nobody has bothered to repair it. I guess if the Sugar code left that patch out, it could easily explain the big strength difference.

It is possible that the introduction of a new book explains the dive, but all the programs in the tournaments use the book, so I doubt it.

Stefan Pohl got new hardware one or two i7 I believe, and he increased the timecontrol (as well as changed book?) This seems to have had the effect that the speed difference for asmFish was not that important anymore and the elo took a dive (relative to Stockfish Dev). The Elo for Stockfish did not ( slightly lower relative to the earlier testing environment, but if you don't know how it is computed relative to what, and with just one datapoint I think, I don't know how you could detect if that would be a regression) Also I don't know how Stefan anchored the elo rating. He did not mention any suspected regressions. Only that he took out surplus Stockfish games in his gamebase I believe, there were too many Stockfish versions.

[Dann Corbit]

It is twice as good at what they call "long time control" compared to the fast time control. (about 7% improvement verses 3.5% improvement.)

Hence, when it moves to real time control (e.g. analyzing games or positions) I think it may be really excellent.

The idea is simple and so other chess engines may also benefit. If you are an author, I suggest you examine "Tweak statScore condition" by GuardianRM.

SF seems to be in a deadlock currently.

Huge hardware power, twice as many tests as in the past, and yet an incredible amount of reds and very few substantial patches.

I guess SF is simply over-tweaked and they don't know how to detweak it in order for new functional patches to start working again.

There was some bad patch between June and August:
http://www.sp-cc.de/

And nobody has bothered to repair it. I guess if the Sugar code left that patch out, it could easily explain the big strength difference.

It is possible that the introduction of a new book explains the dive, but all the programs in the tournaments use the book, so I doubt it.

Stefan Pohl got new hardware one or two i7 I believe, and he increased the timecontrol (as well as changed book?) This seems to have had the effect that the speed difference for asmFish was not that important anymore and the elo took a dive (relative to Stockfish Dev). The Elo for Stockfish did not ( slightly lower relative to the earlier testing environment, but if you don't know how it is computed relative to what, and with just one datapoint I think, I don't know how you could detect if that would be a regression) Also I don't know how Stefan anchored the elo rating. He did not mention any suspected regressions. Only that he took out surplus Stockfish games in his gamebase I believe, there were too many Stockfish versions.

There is no reason that the enormous speed difference of AsmFish should not matter anymore.

Maybe it (the Elo difference) could be a little less, but it should still be very important.

Asmfish always lags SF, and there have not been any changes in some time.

You can also see a loss in the SF build, which over several months should not be there.

I think a very bad change has been injected and it is still there.
In fact, I am almost certain of it.

[Jouni]

Testing framework now have Scaling Trend Prediction! Is it based on the fact, that faster computers have more draws?