LCZero is confusing
Moderators: hgm, Rebel, chrisw
-
- Posts: 3291
- Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 8:15 pm
LCZero is confusing
Here people speak about ELO 500, but elsewhere http://162.217.248.187/ I see ELO 3650!?!?
Jouni
-
- Posts: 88
- Joined: Thu Oct 06, 2016 9:17 pm
- Location: India
Re: LCZero is confusing
I think here we are referring to a common rating list like CCRL or CEGT etc, but there they have a different pool of players (likely just older versions of LC0) so you see it being 3650 rated in that poolJouni wrote:Here people speak about ELO 500, but elsewhere http://162.217.248.187/ I see ELO 3650!?!?
-
- Posts: 1142
- Joined: Thu Dec 28, 2017 4:06 pm
- Location: Argentina
Re: LCZero is confusing
Jouni wrote:Here people speak about ELO 500, but elsewhere http://162.217.248.187/ I see ELO 3650!?!?
That 3000+ number comes from self-play games, with is absolutely useless when compared to any rating list.
Real elo of the current network generation is around 1300-1500 elo, depending on hardware and time control.
Follow my tournament and some Leela gauntlets live at http://twitch.tv/ccls
-
- Posts: 6340
- Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2006 2:34 pm
- Location: Acworth, GA
Re: LCZero is confusing
Well that makes sense, as there is no way in hell I could have beat a 3000+ computer on my 1st attempt.CMCanavessi wrote:Jouni wrote:Here people speak about ELO 500, but elsewhere http://162.217.248.187/ I see ELO 3650!?!?
That 3000+ number comes from self-play games, with is absolutely useless when compared to any rating list.
Real elo of the current network generation is around 1300-1500 elo, depending on hardware and time control.
"Good decisions come from experience, and experience comes from bad decisions."
__________________________________________________________________
Ted Summers
__________________________________________________________________
Ted Summers
-
- Posts: 12541
- Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 8:57 pm
- Location: Redmond, WA USA
Re: LCZero is confusing
The number Elo is meaningless except against the competition in a pool.
The high Elo number is against a random mover.
It will take a long time for LCZero to get to SF level.
The interesting thing is the big, big gains.
We will see if that continues.
I think it is time for a bigger net. Now we see a lot of failures and a slower gain.
The high Elo number is against a random mover.
It will take a long time for LCZero to get to SF level.
The interesting thing is the big, big gains.
We will see if that continues.
I think it is time for a bigger net. Now we see a lot of failures and a slower gain.
Taking ideas is not a vice, it is a virtue. We have another word for this. It is called learning.
But sharing ideas is an even greater virtue. We have another word for this. It is called teaching.
But sharing ideas is an even greater virtue. We have another word for this. It is called teaching.
-
- Posts: 3232
- Joined: Mon May 31, 2010 1:29 pm
- Full name: lucasart
Re: LCZero is confusing
I'm not convinced it's possible, even with infinite resources thrown at it. Already we see that lczero progress is showing strongly diminishing returns. Eventually we'll reach an asymptotic elo level, and I'm ready to bet it will be nowhere close to SF.Dann Corbit wrote:The number Elo is meaningless except against the competition in a pool.
The high Elo number is against a random mover.
It will take a long time for LCZero to get to SF level.
The interesting thing is the big, big gains.
We will see if that continues.
I think it is time for a bigger net. Now we see a lot of failures and a slower gain.
I don't think people realize just how enormous the gap is between lczero and SF. It seems to be taken for granted that lczero will reach SF level, and that it's only a matter of time. I don't think so.
But let's wait and see
Theory and practice sometimes clash. And when that happens, theory loses. Every single time.
-
- Posts: 273
- Joined: Wed Aug 24, 2016 9:49 pm
Re: LCZero is confusing
The current net with 6 blocks will eventuall stall that's perty obvious but there is nothing that can stop us from going 10,20 blocks once that happenslucasart wrote:I'm not convinced it's possible, even with infinite resources thrown at it. Already we see that lczero progress is showing strongly diminishing returns. Eventually we'll reach an asymptotic elo level, and I'm ready to bet it will be nowhere close to SF.Dann Corbit wrote:The number Elo is meaningless except against the competition in a pool.
The high Elo number is against a random mover.
It will take a long time for LCZero to get to SF level.
The interesting thing is the big, big gains.
We will see if that continues.
I think it is time for a bigger net. Now we see a lot of failures and a slower gain.
I don't think people realize just how enormous the gap is between lczero and SF. It seems to be taken for granted that lczero will reach SF level, and that it's only a matter of time. I don't think so.
But let's wait and see
-
- Posts: 7220
- Joined: Mon May 27, 2013 10:31 am
Re: LCZero is confusing
Were the alpha zero games the most expensive chess games ever played?
-
- Posts: 27807
- Joined: Fri Mar 10, 2006 10:06 am
- Location: Amsterdam
- Full name: H G Muller
Re: LCZero is confusing
Stockfish development has been much more expensive, not?
I guess Deep Blue must hold the record, as it used massive hardware that was no good for anything else.
I guess Deep Blue must hold the record, as it used massive hardware that was no good for anything else.
-
- Posts: 7220
- Joined: Mon May 27, 2013 10:31 am
Re: LCZero is confusing
I mean the price per recorded game. The more Stockfish games were recorded the lower the price/value per game.