Daniel Shawul wrote: ↑
Thu Nov 07, 2019 4:42 pm
AndrewGrant wrote: ↑
Thu Nov 07, 2019 8:17 am
dkappe wrote: ↑
Thu Nov 07, 2019 5:51 am
AndrewGrant wrote: ↑
Thu Nov 07, 2019 4:28 am
Albert Silver wrote: ↑
Thu Nov 07, 2019 4:24 am
It is interesting that you consider Scorpio to be a derivative of Lc0. I strongly suspect that Daniel Shawul would take exception to this description.
He is not alone in his thoughts.
Daniel or the original poster?
If the latter, then you’ve produced a real head scratcher. Is leela chess, as the first to colonize DeepMind’s intellectual territory with c++ (there were earlier alpha zero implementations in python), the only original engine, and all others — whether derived from the alpha zero pseudo code or some other source — are henceforth clones? By that logic, all ab chess engines are just clones of Shannon’s original endgame solver. Whether that’s ridiculous is left as an exercise for the reader.
Any engine using in full or in part the code written by the Leela team is a derivative.
If Scorpio is not a Leela clone, what other explanation do you have for a mid-tier engine with an unreadable code base and a rampant history of crashes, bugs, and other play limiting or preventing issues, suddenly shooting up almost overnight to become one of the most powerful engines featured in TCEC / CCC. I won't make you guess the explanation -- the explanation is that anyone can piggy back off the work of the Leela team and with minimal effort build an engine that is a couple hundred elo weaker than Leela.
This coming from someone who has been riding the stockifsh wave for years taking its working ideas and tuning stuff...what a looser.
No, I don't consider you a cloner, but don't get it to your head that you are super-programmer of some sort while the rest of are stupid mortals.
I have seen many prodigys like you who confuse their programming skills to actual understanding of concepts ... give yourself some 5 years
and you understand eventually expoloring new territores is far more enjoyable/difficult/impactful than "tuning to death" of existing methods, especially
when there is a stream of patches coming from stockfish testing framework, which you "cloned" and renamed Ethereal testing framework apparently.
I would rather well you know try out mcts, nn or something else not my cup of tea.
For years, you have been taunting Scorpio crashing etc when it none of your business, and now that it doesn't crash at all but
it actually crashes Ethereal you are worried. I thought this would be a big lesson for you that when you are trying new stuff
,instead of tuning to death, you are bound to introduce some bugs and it is OK...
Yes I do like to give it to you when Scorpio beats Ethereal given the extra length you go to taunt me (you still do), here is another one for you:
Code: Select all
Scorpio 3.0.4 MCTS+NN Maddex - Ethereal 11.53 x64 1CPU 35.0 - 15.0 +22/=26/-2 70.00%
I think the "Leela Wave" has given you an inflated sense of self worth. If you knew anything about Ethereal (And you don't) you would understand the difference between the sort of patches that make it into Ethereal and those that make it into Stockfish.
I find it sad that your #1 criticism is this inane phrase "Tuned to death". Firstly, you don't have a clue what goes on in Ethereal. Secondly, I hardly ever tune and in fact I've never tuned the search, only the eval. Thirdly, in my estimation training a NN is the literal definition of "Tuned to death". Its one thing to be a fool, another to be a hypocrite knowingly.
I could not tell you the last time I checked out the SF framework. It is true that OpenBench is made in the vision of Stockfish's fishtest. In fact, it says that RIGHT in the repository. But you made it clear that you don't actually know much about Ethereal so its no surprise you did not know that. In my experience there has only been 1 (ONE) patch that wins for both Stockfish and Ethereal. Its a patch about ProbCut. That I wrote. That I commited to both engines.
If you ever hop down from your high horse and try to understand something instead of parroting the same shallow critisms of others, you might begin to understand things more clearly. The fact that you are naive enough to think engines can just share patches verbatim proves you don't have a damn clue how things work.
And heres some food for thought. OpenBench is a generalized Fishtest that is being used by, in my current knowledge, at least 10 engines that span about 5 programming languages. I wrote a tool that others are using to improve their engines. I could have just LITERALLY cloned Fishtest and used that if I cared. But I wanted to make a contribution.