Minic version 2

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

Moderators: Harvey Williamson, bob, hgm

Forum rules
This textbox is used to restore diagrams posted with the [d] tag before the upgrade.
User avatar
Werner
Posts: 2548
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 9:09 pm

Re: Minic version 2

Post by Werner » Thu Oct 15, 2020 11:36 am

"Hi
forceNNUE=true
will result in a full NNUE eval, and thus a slow down.
I highly recommand setting this too false to use "hybrid" evaluation (threshold is 600cp currently)."



Thanks Vivien,
settings changed here.
Werner

Gabor Szots
Posts: 623
Joined: Sat Jul 21, 2018 5:43 am
Location: Szentendre, Hungary
Full name: Gabor Szots

Re: Minic version 2

Post by Gabor Szots » Thu Oct 15, 2020 1:06 pm

Werner wrote:
Thu Oct 15, 2020 11:36 am
"Hi
forceNNUE=true
will result in a full NNUE eval, and thus a slow down.
I highly recommand setting this too false to use "hybrid" evaluation (threshold is 600cp currently)."



Thanks Vivien,
settings changed here.
If I understand correctly:

1. Without setting an NNUE file evaluation is always traditional.
2. With an NNUE file but Force NNUE off the evaluation is traditional below 600 cp but NNUE is used above 600 cp.*
3. With an NNUE file and Force NNUE on the evaluation is always NNUE.

*What if switching between evaluation methods the 600 cp threshold also switches?
Gabor Szots
CCRL testing group

User avatar
xr_a_y
Posts: 1320
Joined: Sat Nov 25, 2017 1:28 pm
Location: France

Re: Minic version 2

Post by xr_a_y » Thu Oct 15, 2020 1:09 pm

Gabor Szots wrote:
Thu Oct 15, 2020 1:06 pm
Werner wrote:
Thu Oct 15, 2020 11:36 am
"Hi
forceNNUE=true
will result in a full NNUE eval, and thus a slow down.
I highly recommand setting this too false to use "hybrid" evaluation (threshold is 600cp currently)."



Thanks Vivien,
settings changed here.
If I understand correctly:

1. Without setting an NNUE file evaluation is always traditional.
2. With an NNUE file but Force NNUE off the evaluation is traditional below 600 cp but NNUE is used above 600 cp.*
3. With an NNUE file and Force NNUE on the evaluation is always NNUE.

*What if switching between evaluation methods the 600 cp threshold also switches?
1. correct
2. no. It is the other way around: NNUE if material imbalance < 600 and standard if not (for already decided positions)
3. correct

Gabor Szots
Posts: 623
Joined: Sat Jul 21, 2018 5:43 am
Location: Szentendre, Hungary
Full name: Gabor Szots

Re: Minic version 2

Post by Gabor Szots » Thu Oct 15, 2020 1:13 pm

xr_a_y wrote:
Thu Oct 15, 2020 1:09 pm
1. correct
2. no. It is the other way around: NNUE if material imbalance < 600 and standard if not (for already decided positions)
3. correct
Thanks, it was not clear that the difference was material.
Gabor Szots
CCRL testing group

ehas
Posts: 5
Joined: Fri Jan 04, 2019 12:30 pm
Full name: Eric Hughes Santiago

Re: Minic version 2

Post by ehas » Fri Oct 16, 2020 2:10 am

Hi, thanks for reporting. I am pretty sure that sure work. Something relative to path may be wrong. Easiest way to be sure is to put net in the same directory and just use its name as input.

2.48 has less logging about NNUE, I am not sure it loaded net in your example. Check if nps are small to be sure the net is loaded under 2.48.
[/quote]



Putting the net in the same directory and using only the name as input made it work.

Thank you.

User avatar
Werner
Posts: 2548
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 9:09 pm

Re: Minic version 2

Post by Werner » Fri Oct 16, 2020 4:30 pm

Hm,
cannot get running minic_2.52_mingw_x64_skylake.exe in a GUI (Arena says 0MB; in Shredder GUI crashes).
works ok im command promt.
info string This is Minic version 2.52 (NNUE available)
info string Info 2020-10-16 18:24:52-750: No NNUE net given
info string Info 2020-10-16 18:24:52-752: Classical evaluation enabled.
setoption name NNUEFile value nascent_nutrient.bin
info string Info 2020-10-16 18:26:03-462: NNUE evaluation using nascent_nutrient.bin enabled.
go depth 2
info depth 1 score cp 1 time 1 nodes 23 nps 22999 seldepth 1 pv d2d4 tbhits 0
info depth 2 score cp 143 time 1 nodes 45 nps 44999 seldepth 2 pv d2d4 b8c6 tbhits 0
bestmove d2d4 ponder b8c6:
reason here: it happens, when I use 256 MB hash instead of 128 MB default. Here Arena is ok, Shredder GUI still crashes.
Last edited by Werner on Fri Oct 16, 2020 4:33 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Werner

User avatar
xr_a_y
Posts: 1320
Joined: Sat Nov 25, 2017 1:28 pm
Location: France

Re: Minic version 2

Post by xr_a_y » Fri Oct 16, 2020 4:31 pm

Ok let me check that on my Windows box.
If 2.51 was working this is due to my memory leak patch. So something wrong with aligned memory under Windows...

User avatar
xr_a_y
Posts: 1320
Joined: Sat Nov 25, 2017 1:28 pm
Location: France

Re: Minic version 2

Post by xr_a_y » Fri Oct 16, 2020 5:17 pm

xr_a_y wrote:
Fri Oct 16, 2020 4:31 pm
Ok let me check that on my Windows box.
If 2.51 was working this is due to my memory leak patch. So something wrong with aligned memory under Windows...
As usual, I pushed too fast :oops: :oops: :oops: . Fixed in 2.53, will release tonight. Very sorry. Thanks for reporting.

User avatar
Werner
Posts: 2548
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 9:09 pm

Re: Minic version 2

Post by Werner » Sat Oct 17, 2020 8:08 am

xr_a_y wrote:
Fri Oct 16, 2020 5:17 pm
As usual, I pushed too fast :oops: :oops: :oops: . Fixed in 2.53, will release tonight. Very sorry. Thanks for reporting.
Thanks Vivien,
2.53 works now ok under Windows. Do you think there is an Elo difference to 2.51 - or it only causes somtimes crashes?
Werner

User avatar
xr_a_y
Posts: 1320
Joined: Sat Nov 25, 2017 1:28 pm
Location: France

Re: Minic version 2

Post by xr_a_y » Sat Oct 17, 2020 8:10 am

Werner wrote:
Sat Oct 17, 2020 8:08 am
xr_a_y wrote:
Fri Oct 16, 2020 5:17 pm
As usual, I pushed too fast :oops: :oops: :oops: . Fixed in 2.53, will release tonight. Very sorry. Thanks for reporting.
Thanks Vivien,
2.53 works now ok under Windows. Do you think there is an Elo difference to 2.51 - or it only causes somtimes crashes?
No Elo diff versus 2.51 (just memory leak fixes).

Post Reply