Chess.com 2018 computer chess championship

Discussion of anything and everything relating to chess playing software and machines.

Moderators: bob, hgm, Harvey Williamson

Forum rules
This textbox is used to restore diagrams posted with the [d] tag before the upgrade.
AndrewGrant
Posts: 494
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2016 4:08 am
Location: U.S.A
Full name: Andrew Grant
Contact:

Re: Chess.com 2018 computer chess championship

Post by AndrewGrant » Mon Sep 17, 2018 11:39 am

George Tsavdaris wrote:
Mon Sep 17, 2018 11:37 am
Not really.
I heard this second hand, so it seems I am wrong.

Maybe there is an even newer Fizbo, I don't know.

Sorry for the inaccuracy.

jp
Posts: 839
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2018 5:54 am

Re: Chess.com 2018 computer chess championship

Post by jp » Mon Sep 17, 2018 1:44 pm

Gary Internet wrote:
Mon Sep 17, 2018 6:19 am
They need to implement tablebase adjudication for this tournament to cut down o the number of times we end up watching engines messing about for 100+ moves of pointless crap.
At least 6 man if not 7 man adjudication
The problem is Lc0 is really bad at endgames.

mjlef
Posts: 1428
Joined: Thu Mar 30, 2006 12:08 pm
Contact:

Re: Chess.com 2018 computer chess championship

Post by mjlef » Mon Sep 17, 2018 2:23 pm

jp wrote:
Mon Sep 17, 2018 1:44 pm
Gary Internet wrote:
Mon Sep 17, 2018 6:19 am
They need to implement tablebase adjudication for this tournament to cut down o the number of times we end up watching engines messing about for 100+ moves of pointless crap.
At least 6 man if not 7 man adjudication
The problem is Lc0 is really bad at endgames.
I know Alpha Zero adjudicated the games it played versus Stockfish. Looking at a few of the 10 games they published, they do seem like losses for Stockfish. But I if Alpha Zero would have been able to finish the game. If you play until ahead some amount, will a nn engine be able to play to the end accurately all the time? I suppose this could be tested, but maybe this weakness might have not been found without playing to the actual end. Perhaps nn engine should be trained to the end of the game, or until they see mate or at least a draw score for a while.

jkiliani
Posts: 143
Joined: Wed Jan 17, 2018 12:26 pm

Re: Chess.com 2018 computer chess championship

Post by jkiliani » Mon Sep 17, 2018 2:33 pm

mjlef wrote:
Mon Sep 17, 2018 2:23 pm
jp wrote:
Mon Sep 17, 2018 1:44 pm
Gary Internet wrote:
Mon Sep 17, 2018 6:19 am
They need to implement tablebase adjudication for this tournament to cut down o the number of times we end up watching engines messing about for 100+ moves of pointless crap.
At least 6 man if not 7 man adjudication
The problem is Lc0 is really bad at endgames.
I know Alpha Zero adjudicated the games it played versus Stockfish. Looking at a few of the 10 games they published, they do seem like losses for Stockfish. But I if Alpha Zero would have been able to finish the game. If you play until ahead some amount, will a nn engine be able to play to the end accurately all the time? I suppose this could be tested, but maybe this weakness might have not been found without playing to the actual end. Perhaps nn engine should be trained to the end of the game, or until they see mate or at least a draw score for a while.
Lc0 now has a training run using tablebase rescoring for training, rather soon we should be able to see improvements in endgame play from this.

Milos
Posts: 3387
Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 12:47 am

Re: Chess.com 2018 computer chess championship

Post by Milos » Mon Sep 17, 2018 4:10 pm

jkiliani wrote:
Mon Sep 17, 2018 2:33 pm
mjlef wrote:
Mon Sep 17, 2018 2:23 pm
jp wrote:
Mon Sep 17, 2018 1:44 pm
Gary Internet wrote:
Mon Sep 17, 2018 6:19 am
They need to implement tablebase adjudication for this tournament to cut down o the number of times we end up watching engines messing about for 100+ moves of pointless crap.
At least 6 man if not 7 man adjudication
The problem is Lc0 is really bad at endgames.
I know Alpha Zero adjudicated the games it played versus Stockfish. Looking at a few of the 10 games they published, they do seem like losses for Stockfish. But I if Alpha Zero would have been able to finish the game. If you play until ahead some amount, will a nn engine be able to play to the end accurately all the time? I suppose this could be tested, but maybe this weakness might have not been found without playing to the actual end. Perhaps nn engine should be trained to the end of the game, or until they see mate or at least a draw score for a while.
Lc0 now has a training run using tablebase rescoring for training, rather soon we should be able to see improvements in endgame play from this.
And you still keep "0" in the name, what a joke...

User avatar
CMCanavessi
Posts: 840
Joined: Thu Dec 28, 2017 3:06 pm
Location: Argentina

Re: Chess.com 2018 computer chess championship

Post by CMCanavessi » Mon Sep 17, 2018 4:28 pm

Milos wrote:
Mon Sep 17, 2018 4:10 pm
jkiliani wrote:
Mon Sep 17, 2018 2:33 pm
mjlef wrote:
Mon Sep 17, 2018 2:23 pm
jp wrote:
Mon Sep 17, 2018 1:44 pm
Gary Internet wrote:
Mon Sep 17, 2018 6:19 am
They need to implement tablebase adjudication for this tournament to cut down o the number of times we end up watching engines messing about for 100+ moves of pointless crap.
At least 6 man if not 7 man adjudication
The problem is Lc0 is really bad at endgames.
I know Alpha Zero adjudicated the games it played versus Stockfish. Looking at a few of the 10 games they published, they do seem like losses for Stockfish. But I if Alpha Zero would have been able to finish the game. If you play until ahead some amount, will a nn engine be able to play to the end accurately all the time? I suppose this could be tested, but maybe this weakness might have not been found without playing to the actual end. Perhaps nn engine should be trained to the end of the game, or until they see mate or at least a draw score for a while.
Lc0 now has a training run using tablebase rescoring for training, rather soon we should be able to see improvements in endgame play from this.
And you still keep "0" in the name, what a joke...
I know you're just trolling, but (even if I don't like) TBs don't break the zero rule. It's not "human knowledge", it's perfect chess.
Follow my tournament and some Leela gauntlets live at http://twitch.tv/ccls

Milos
Posts: 3387
Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 12:47 am

Re: Chess.com 2018 computer chess championship

Post by Milos » Mon Sep 17, 2018 4:30 pm

CMCanavessi wrote:
Mon Sep 17, 2018 4:28 pm
Milos wrote:
Mon Sep 17, 2018 4:10 pm
jkiliani wrote:
Mon Sep 17, 2018 2:33 pm
mjlef wrote:
Mon Sep 17, 2018 2:23 pm
jp wrote:
Mon Sep 17, 2018 1:44 pm
Gary Internet wrote:
Mon Sep 17, 2018 6:19 am
They need to implement tablebase adjudication for this tournament to cut down o the number of times we end up watching engines messing about for 100+ moves of pointless crap.
At least 6 man if not 7 man adjudication
The problem is Lc0 is really bad at endgames.
I know Alpha Zero adjudicated the games it played versus Stockfish. Looking at a few of the 10 games they published, they do seem like losses for Stockfish. But I if Alpha Zero would have been able to finish the game. If you play until ahead some amount, will a nn engine be able to play to the end accurately all the time? I suppose this could be tested, but maybe this weakness might have not been found without playing to the actual end. Perhaps nn engine should be trained to the end of the game, or until they see mate or at least a draw score for a while.
Lc0 now has a training run using tablebase rescoring for training, rather soon we should be able to see improvements in endgame play from this.
And you still keep "0" in the name, what a joke...
I know you're just trolling, but (even if I don't like) TBs don't break the zero rule. It's not "human knowledge", it's perfect chess.
So perfect chess knowledge is equal to zero knowledge, lol. Your logic is really irrefutable :lol: :lol:.

MikeGL
Posts: 901
Joined: Thu Sep 01, 2011 12:49 pm

Re: Chess.com 2018 computer chess championship

Post by MikeGL » Mon Sep 17, 2018 5:46 pm

jp wrote:
Mon Sep 17, 2018 1:44 pm
Gary Internet wrote:
Mon Sep 17, 2018 6:19 am
They need to implement tablebase adjudication for this tournament to cut down o the number of times we end up watching engines messing about for 100+ moves of pointless crap.
At least 6 man if not 7 man adjudication
The problem is Lc0 is really bad at endgames.
But I think Lc0 with TB or syzygy support would solve this problem easily.
Not sure if Lc0 at CCCC have TB support though.
I told my wife that a husband is like a fine wine; he gets better with age. The next day, she locked me in the cellar.

Jesse Gersenson
Posts: 575
Joined: Sat Aug 20, 2011 7:43 am
Contact:

Re: Chess.com 2018 computer chess championship

Post by Jesse Gersenson » Mon Sep 17, 2018 5:55 pm

MikeGL wrote:
Mon Sep 17, 2018 5:46 pm
But I think Lc0 with TB or syzygy support would solve this problem easily.
Not sure if Lc0 at CCCC have TB support though.
No TB's for Lc0; the Lc0 team asked to have TB disabled for their engine.

chessdev
Posts: 31
Joined: Mon Apr 26, 2010 12:47 am

Re: Chess.com 2018 computer chess championship

Post by chessdev » Mon Sep 17, 2018 6:15 pm

We may consider doing TB adjudication in the future. That said, our time controls are short, and I believe we've seen some interesting games and positions because we haven't adjudicated. I'm open to suggestions! Perhaps for TB draws... but for wins, let's see it played out!?

Post Reply