TalkChess.com

Dariusz Orzechowski wrote: I also tried a match of LCZ (the same HW and TC as above) against minimal SF9 (1 CPU, 32 MB hash, no book, no syzygy) with Noomen 2-moves openings and it was unfortunately almost absolute slaughter, around 96% for SF.

Dariusz Orzechowski wrote:I can confirm that:
- LCZ on GTX1060 and 1m+1s TC is now in CCRL 2900 ballpark (I tested ID228) when tested against engines in roughly 2900-3100 range,
- cuDNN version is much faster but doesn't look any stronger than OpenCL one.

I also tried a match of LCZ (the same HW and TC as above) against minimal SF9 (1 CPU, 32 MB hash, no book, no syzygy) with Noomen 2-moves openings and it was unfortunately almost absolute slaughter, around 96% for SF. I'm really curious to see how LCZ is going to overcome SF as many people seem certain it will happen. I'm not so sure that SF would go so quietly into the night.

jp wrote:

Dariusz Orzechowski wrote: I also tried a match of LCZ (the same HW and TC as above) against minimal SF9 (1 CPU, 32 MB hash, no book, no syzygy) with Noomen 2-moves openings and it was unfortunately almost absolute slaughter, around 96% for SF.

Which Noomen 2-move openings? Can you give a link?

This result doesn't seem surprising. Even minimal SF8 or SF7 or SF6 maybe's too much.

Albert Silver wrote:Remember that LCZ first began self-learning in February. It is now over 2900 CCRL. That is quite incredible if you ask me.

Dariusz Orzechowski wrote:

Albert Silver wrote:Remember that LCZ first began self-learning in February. It is now over 2900 CCRL. That is quite incredible if you ask me.

I'm not attacking so I don't know why you go on defensive here.

Dariusz Orzechowski wrote:For me it's exciting but it's not that incredible as I was following Leela Zero in go and something similar happened there. I like playing against pure policy networks (1 playout, no search), it's a lot of fun in both chess and go. In go pure network is already around 3-4 dan level which would correspond to FM/IM level in chess I guess. I'm pretty confident it's possible to get pure network to around 5-6 dan in go and GM level in chess.

Albert Silver wrote:

Dariusz Orzechowski wrote:For me it's exciting but it's not that incredible as I was following Leela Zero in go and something similar happened there. I like playing against pure policy networks (1 playout, no search), it's a lot of fun in both chess and go. In go pure network is already around 3-4 dan level which would correspond to FM/IM level in chess I guess. I'm pretty confident it's possible to get pure network to around 5-6 dan in go and GM level in chess.

I think it is already at least SuperGM level.

Dariusz Orzechowski wrote:

Albert Silver wrote:

Dariusz Orzechowski wrote:For me it's exciting but it's not that incredible as I was following Leela Zero in go and something similar happened there. I like playing against pure policy networks (1 playout, no search), it's a lot of fun in both chess and go. In go pure network is already around 3-4 dan level which would correspond to FM/IM level in chess I guess. I'm pretty confident it's possible to get pure network to around 5-6 dan in go and GM level in chess.

I think it is already at least SuperGM level.

This is just highly innacurate. Pure network is perhaps around 2000 now what makes it a very decent player anyway.

Dann Corbit wrote:

Dariusz Orzechowski wrote:

Albert Silver wrote:

Dariusz Orzechowski wrote:For me it's exciting but it's not that incredible as I was following Leela Zero in go and something similar happened there. I like playing against pure policy networks (1 playout, no search), it's a lot of fun in both chess and go. In go pure network is already around 3-4 dan level which would correspond to FM/IM level in chess I guess. I'm pretty confident it's possible to get pure network to around 5-6 dan in go and GM level in chess.

I think it is already at least SuperGM level.

This is just highly innacurate. Pure network is perhaps around 2000 now what makes it a very decent player anyway.

I think this is apples and oranges.
Albert was talking about the current state of the LCZero project and you about using a pure network.

Dariusz Orzechowski wrote:

Dann Corbit wrote:

Dariusz Orzechowski wrote:

Albert Silver wrote:

Dariusz Orzechowski wrote:For me it's exciting but it's not that incredible as I was following Leela Zero in go and something similar happened there. I like playing against pure policy networks (1 playout, no search), it's a lot of fun in both chess and go. In go pure network is already around 3-4 dan level which would correspond to FM/IM level in chess I guess. I'm pretty confident it's possible to get pure network to around 5-6 dan in go and GM level in chess.

I think it is already at least SuperGM level.

This is just highly innacurate. Pure network is perhaps around 2000 now what makes it a very decent player anyway.

I think this is apples and oranges.
Albert was talking about the current state of the LCZero project and you about using a pure network.

I have no idea how it's possible to spin it this way. He quoted what I said about pure network and answered with a statement that is demonstrably not true.

Albert Silver wrote:

Dariusz Orzechowski wrote:

Dann Corbit wrote:

Dariusz Orzechowski wrote:

Albert Silver wrote:

Dariusz Orzechowski wrote:For me it's exciting but it's not that incredible as I was following Leela Zero in go and something similar happened there. I like playing against pure policy networks (1 playout, no search), it's a lot of fun in both chess and go. In go pure network is already around 3-4 dan level which would correspond to FM/IM level in chess I guess. I'm pretty confident it's possible to get pure network to around 5-6 dan in go and GM level in chess.

I think it is already at least SuperGM level.

This is just highly innacurate. Pure network is perhaps around 2000 now what makes it a very decent player anyway.

I think this is apples and oranges.
Albert was talking about the current state of the LCZero project and you about using a pure network.

I have no idea how it's possible to spin it this way. He quoted what I said about pure network and answered with a statement that is demonstrably not true.

It is possible because you presented a match result, then quoted LCZero's strength at ~2900 CCRL, which I am pretty sure is not 2000 Elo. I also have no idea what the strength of a 'pure network' even means. If you are suggesting plain single node play with no search tree of any kind then I am sure it is MUCH weaker than 2000 Elo.