cucumber wrote: ↑Thu May 28, 2020 8:24 pm
Wow, this is really cool. Do you think you could talk about the methodology behind Lc1.epd?
Chris analyzed the Lcx positions with Lc0 on his RTX 2080 on long time control.
Also, would you be able to test Fire 7.1 again? I'm surprised to see it so low. It seems like a major outlier compared to what rating lists show.
There is something strange with Fire, I never get the results the rating lists offer and not only with this tool. I have Fire run now for the 4000ms list. Maybe it's just a scaling issue.
90% of coding is debugging, the other 10% is writing bugs.
cucumber wrote: ↑Thu May 28, 2020 8:24 pm
Wow, this is really cool. Do you think you could talk about the methodology behind Lc1.epd?
Chris analyzed the Lcx positions with Lc0 on his RTX 2080 on long time control.
Also, would you be able to test Fire 7.1 again? I'm surprised to see it so low. It seems like a major outlier compared to what rating lists show.
There is something strange with Fire, I never get the results the rating lists offer and not only with this tool. I have Fire run now for the 4000ms list. Maybe it's just a scaling issue.
That's really interesting! I wonder if Norman knows what might be causing that. Thanks for such a quick reply.
This is an interesting benchmark to me. For the most part this seems reasonably accurate.
I find it interesting to compare your lists with 1s/move and 4s/move. Booot moving up relative to Laser and Rubichess was somewhat expected. Notable is Ethereals improvement which seems to cement it well above "the rest" with more time.
I wonder how much this list represents tactical or positional capabilities of an engine?
cucumber wrote: ↑Thu May 28, 2020 8:24 pm
Wow, this is really cool. Do you think you could talk about the methodology behind Lc1.epd?
Chris analyzed the Lcx positions with Lc0 on his RTX 2080 on long time control.
Also, would you be able to test Fire 7.1 again? I'm surprised to see it so low. It seems like a major outlier compared to what rating lists show.
There is something strange with Fire, I never get the results the rating lists offer and not only with this tool. I have Fire run now for the 4000ms list. Maybe it's just a scaling issue.
That's really interesting! I wonder if Norman knows what might be causing that. Thanks for such a quick reply.
jorose wrote: ↑Fri May 29, 2020 2:47 am
This is an interesting benchmark to me. For the most part this seems reasonably accurate.
I find it interesting to compare your lists with 1s/move and 4s/move. Booot moving up relative to Laser and Rubichess was somewhat expected. Notable is Ethereals improvement which seems to cement it well above "the rest" with more time.
I wonder how much this list represents tactical or positional capabilities of an engine?
P.S.: Thank you for testing Winter 0.8
I have no idea.
Positions mainly come from a 9.8 million EPD set from Dann Corbit and the 40,000 positions of lc1.epd were randomly chosen.
90% of coding is debugging, the other 10% is writing bugs.