Have we hit a wall on chess software after Rybka 4 came out?

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.
jplchess
Posts: 115
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2010 6:13 am

Have we hit a wall on chess software after Rybka 4 came out?

Post by jplchess » Wed Jun 09, 2010 11:52 pm

After Rybka 4 came out have we hit a WALL concerning software with tactics and postition? This excludes the opening library, endgame tablebases, and hardware. If there is room for improvement, then what would it be besides closed games?

I was a big fan of Mephisto Genius when it came out 17 years ago. The executable was 54,313 bytes for version number 2. That one was a senior master at the time and a grandmaster in tactics.

I am also a big fan of Fischer Random because obviously the opening library is very limited.

Please make some constructive posts. :idea:

User avatar
Graham Banks
Posts: 33239
Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2006 9:52 am
Location: Auckland, NZ

Re: Have we hit a wall on chess software after Rybka 4 came

Post by Graham Banks » Wed Jun 09, 2010 11:57 pm

The horizon effect is still a problem, but I guess it will remain so for a long time to come.
Therefore, further development of long term planning could be a goal?
I'm not a programmer though.
My email addresses:
gbanksnz at gmail.com
gbanksnz at yahoo.co.nz

Albert Silver
Posts: 2869
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 8:57 pm
Location: Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

Re: Have we hit a wall on chess software after Rybka 4 came

Post by Albert Silver » Wed Jun 09, 2010 11:58 pm

jplchess wrote:After Rybka 4 came out have we hit a WALL concerning software with tactics and postition? This excludes the opening library, endgame tablebases, and hardware. If there is room for improvement, then what would it be besides closed games?

I was a big fan of Mephisto Genius when it came out 17 years ago. The executable was 54,313 bytes for version number 2. That one was a senior master at the time and a grandmaster in tactics.

I am also a big fan of Fischer Random because obviously the opening library is very limited.

Please make some constructive posts. :idea:
We haven't hit a wall, not by a fair margin. Rybka 4 displays numerous weaknesses still IMHO, whether in the opening/middlegame, to the endgame.
"Tactics are the bricks and sticks that make up a game, but positional play is the architectural blueprint."

Nimzovik
Posts: 1831
Joined: Sat Jan 06, 2007 10:08 pm

Re: Have we hit a wall on chess software after Rybka 4 came

Post by Nimzovik » Thu Jun 10, 2010 3:24 am

Of course the wall has not been hit . Just ask Pablo :wink:

Albert Silver
Posts: 2869
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 8:57 pm
Location: Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

Re: Have we hit a wall on chess software after Rybka 4 came

Post by Albert Silver » Thu Jun 10, 2010 3:28 am

Nimzovik wrote:Of course the wall has not been hit . Just ask Pablo :wink:
I don't know. It looks like a wall to me...

[D]1r6/r7/2bkp3/1p1p1p1p/p1pP1PpP/P1P1P1B1/1PK4P/1N1B4 b - - 0 150[D]

:lol:
"Tactics are the bricks and sticks that make up a game, but positional play is the architectural blueprint."

User avatar
Bill Rogers
Posts: 3562
Joined: Thu Mar 09, 2006 2:54 am
Location: San Jose, California

Re: Have we hit a wall on chess software after Rybka 4 came

Post by Bill Rogers » Thu Jun 10, 2010 8:14 am

You think that we hit a wall? Let me ask you who was number one before Rybka, number two? As long as there are chess programmers there will be the possibliity of someone improving the game. In my opinion only when chess has been somewhat solbed will we come close to a wall.
Every time someone creates a new super program many people seem to think it is the last and greatest only to have someone else make a better one.
Bill

swami
Posts: 6536
Joined: Thu Mar 09, 2006 3:21 am

Re: Have we hit a wall on chess software after Rybka 4 came

Post by swami » Thu Jun 10, 2010 4:38 pm

jplchess wrote:After Rybka 4 came out have we hit a WALL concerning software with tactics and postition?
No, there still appears that there's a lot to improve upon, I'd guess.

Engines are not perfect at strategy I can assure you, because I have gone through validating 2000 positions for STS. It's toughest to evaluate the position. Strategy is what prevents computers from permanently solving chess, if there's ever such a thing. It's way too deep.

Engines are near perfect in dynamic tactics.

Eastendboy

Re: Have we hit a wall on chess software after Rybka 4 came

Post by Eastendboy » Fri Jun 11, 2010 9:40 am

swami wrote: Engines are near perfect in dynamic tactics.
Until a human with free time and a time control of 10 moves in 40 days comes along and improves on perfection. :wink:

Robert Flesher
Posts: 1216
Joined: Tue Aug 18, 2009 1:06 am

Re: Have we hit a wall on chess software after Rybka 4 came

Post by Robert Flesher » Fri Jun 11, 2010 11:37 am

swami wrote:
jplchess wrote:After Rybka 4 came out have we hit a WALL concerning software with tactics and postition?
No, there still appears that there's a lot to improve upon, I'd guess.

Engines are not perfect at strategy I can assure you, because I have gone through validating 2000 positions for STS. It's toughest to evaluate the position. Strategy is what prevents computers from permanently solving chess, if there's ever such a thing. It's way too deep.

Engines are near perfect in dynamic tactics.

I say not even close to pefect, but far better than fleshlings, like me and you :P

User avatar
M ANSARI
Posts: 3411
Joined: Thu Mar 16, 2006 6:10 pm

Re: Have we hit a wall on chess software after Rybka 4 came

Post by M ANSARI » Sat Jun 12, 2010 5:03 am

A lot of things can still be improved upon. R4 is obviously a Rybka with some stuff omitted to preserve some secrets, so we really don't know how far the engine has progressed. But I think better usage of hardware will improve engines by quite a bit. If you play an engine against itself with a time handicap, you will find that it can score much better with more time. Some new technologies such as Monte Carlo might come into effect in real time. Or maybe an End Game module. With more and more cores also being available on a simple home PC, the engines will start acting like clusters and will have cores to look at mundane things or dramatic sacs that would otherwise have been pruned. I think there is at least a good 200 to 300 ELO left before we start reaching a level of no more improvements ... at least at LTC's.

Post Reply