LCZero is confusing

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

Moderators: hgm, Rebel, chrisw

Jouni
Posts: 3282
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 8:15 pm

LCZero is confusing

Post by Jouni »

Here people speak about ELO 500, but elsewhere http://162.217.248.187/ I see ELO 3650!?!?
Jouni
mkchan
Posts: 88
Joined: Thu Oct 06, 2016 9:17 pm
Location: India

Re: LCZero is confusing

Post by mkchan »

Jouni wrote:Here people speak about ELO 500, but elsewhere http://162.217.248.187/ I see ELO 3650!?!?
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 pool
User avatar
CMCanavessi
Posts: 1142
Joined: Thu Dec 28, 2017 4:06 pm
Location: Argentina

Re: LCZero is confusing

Post by CMCanavessi »

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
User avatar
AdminX
Posts: 6339
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2006 2:34 pm
Location: Acworth, GA

Re: LCZero is confusing

Post by AdminX »

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.
Well that makes sense, as there is no way in hell I could have beat a 3000+ computer on my 1st attempt. :D
"Good decisions come from experience, and experience comes from bad decisions."
__________________________________________________________________
Ted Summers
Dann Corbit
Posts: 12538
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 8:57 pm
Location: Redmond, WA USA

Re: LCZero is confusing

Post by Dann Corbit »

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.
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.
User avatar
lucasart
Posts: 3232
Joined: Mon May 31, 2010 1:29 pm
Full name: lucasart

Re: LCZero is confusing

Post by lucasart »

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'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.

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.
CheckersGuy
Posts: 273
Joined: Wed Aug 24, 2016 9:49 pm

Re: LCZero is confusing

Post by CheckersGuy »

lucasart wrote:
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'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.

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
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 happens :D
Henk
Posts: 7216
Joined: Mon May 27, 2013 10:31 am

Re: LCZero is confusing

Post by Henk »

Were the alpha zero games the most expensive chess games ever played?
User avatar
hgm
Posts: 27790
Joined: Fri Mar 10, 2006 10:06 am
Location: Amsterdam
Full name: H G Muller

Re: LCZero is confusing

Post by hgm »

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.
Henk
Posts: 7216
Joined: Mon May 27, 2013 10:31 am

Re: LCZero is confusing

Post by Henk »

I mean the price per recorded game. The more Stockfish games were recorded the lower the price/value per game.