What was the last good Rodent?

[PK]

I have just compiled Rodent 0.238 and added a zip archive to the history section - see http://www.pkoziol.cal24.pl/rodent/history.htm

[carldaman]

Thanks a lot, Pawel.

A good old version to archive.

[BrendanJNorman]

I have read a lot about the Rodent chess engine, regarding its playing style, and I finally got to test it. The Rodent III 0.287 version, to my disappointment.

So when I say "good", I'm talking about the playing style. The great thing about a playing style is that you don't need to play hundreds of games, a few are enough to showcase the style. Traditionally, I play 10 games with minimal books.

The first thing is to calibrate an opposing engine, so that you get results close to 50% performance. In this case, it looks like Wasp 3.60 at fixed depth 19 plays a bit stronger than Rodent at depth 20, so I used that (here's the PGN for collectors.)

I didn't see anything special about Rodent's style whatsoever in these games, just look at this game:

[pgn]1.g3 d5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.Bg2 g6 4.d4 Bg7 5.Nc3 O-O 6.O-O Bf5 7.Ne5 c6 8.h3 Nbd7 9.g4 Be6 10.f4 Nb8 11.Qd3 Bc8 12.a3 Nbd7 13.Bd2 Qc7 14.Qf3 a5 15.Qf2 a4 16.Rae1 Qb6 17.Bc1 Qc7 18.Kh1 e6 19.e4 Nxe4 20.Nxe4 dxe4 21.Bxe4 c5 22.Be3 Nf6 23.Bg2 c4 24.d5 exd5 25.Bb6 Qb8 26.Bc5 Qc7 27.Bxf8 Kxf8 28.f5 gxf5 29.Qf4 Qc5 30.gxf5 Ra6 31.Re2 Qd6 32.Rd1 b5 33.Bf3 Bb7 34.Qg3 Bh8 35.Rg1 h6 36.Reg2 Ke7 37.Qh4 Qxe5 38.Re2 Qxe2 39.Bxe2 Kd7 40.Bf3 Ra8 41.Qxh6 Re8 42.h4 Bc6 43.Qf4 Kc8 44.h5 Ne4 45.h6 Rd8 46.Bxe4 dxe4 47.h7 e3+ 48.Kh2 e2 49.Qe3 Kb7 50.Qxe2 Bxb2 51.Rg8 Rd5 52.h8=Q Bxh8 53.Rxh8 Rd7 54.Qe5 Ka6 55.Qc5 Kb7 56.Rh6 f6 57.Rxf6 1-0[/pgn]

Very nice, huh? Except it was Wasp who was white I think black on this game is a good representation of what you'd expect to see from Rodent (9...Be6 10...Nb8 11...Bc8 12...Nbd7 ).

I know it has a couple dozen personalities and that some ought to blow me out the water, but I'd just think, what if some previous version of Rodent played as awesome as people praised it for by default, and the personalities would just enhance something already great?

Seeking help from people used to Rodent, do you know what was the last engine version with "the sparkle"?

Nice to see some old friends talking about my favorite chess engine.

I have been very busy with my new baby, fixing a legal blunder, and working on a secret project that only Pawel will know about...

But I also have wondered which version of Rodent played the nicest chess by default, because I had noticed that something happened with the Texel tuning introduced.

Have downloaded 0.238 and doing some tests when I have time.

[carldaman]

Welcome back, Norman -- nice to hear you're doing well.

Texel tuning is known to smooth out the rough edges and corners that actually lend personality to an engine.

All for a bundle of rating points. Probably not worth it, in my view, unless the Elo gained is meaningful to the developer.

[Ovyron]

Welcome back, Norman -- nice to hear you're doing well.

Yes, I'm so glad Brendan hasn't quit the forum. Waiting for more news from him.

[PeterO]

Hi Pavel,

I love to play on the wooden chessboard of the Millenium Chess Genius Exclusive.
Question: Can you please make a android version of Rodent that supports the Chess for Android - app (Aart Bik)?
I would love to modify Rodents playing style - in the „Chess for Android“ app!

Peter

[supersharp77]

I have read a lot about the Rodent chess engine, regarding its playing style, and I finally got to test it. The Rodent III 0.287 version, to my disappointment.

So when I say "good", I'm talking about the playing style. The great thing about a playing style is that you don't need to play hundreds of games, a few are enough to showcase the style. Traditionally, I play 10 games with minimal books.

The first thing is to calibrate an opposing engine, so that you get results close to 50% performance. In this case, it looks like Wasp 3.60 at fixed depth 19 plays a bit stronger than Rodent at depth 20, so I used that (here's the PGN for collectors.)

I didn't see anything special about Rodent's style whatsoever in these games, just look at this game:

[pgn]1.g3 d5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.Bg2 g6 4.d4 Bg7 5.Nc3 O-O 6.O-O Bf5 7.Ne5 c6 8.h3 Nbd7 9.g4 Be6 10.f4 Nb8 11.Qd3 Bc8 12.a3 Nbd7 13.Bd2 Qc7 14.Qf3 a5 15.Qf2 a4 16.Rae1 Qb6 17.Bc1 Qc7 18.Kh1 e6 19.e4 Nxe4 20.Nxe4 dxe4 21.Bxe4 c5 22.Be3 Nf6 23.Bg2 c4 24.d5 exd5 25.Bb6 Qb8 26.Bc5 Qc7 27.Bxf8 Kxf8 28.f5 gxf5 29.Qf4 Qc5 30.gxf5 Ra6 31.Re2 Qd6 32.Rd1 b5 33.Bf3 Bb7 34.Qg3 Bh8 35.Rg1 h6 36.Reg2 Ke7 37.Qh4 Qxe5 38.Re2 Qxe2 39.Bxe2 Kd7 40.Bf3 Ra8 41.Qxh6 Re8 42.h4 Bc6 43.Qf4 Kc8 44.h5 Ne4 45.h6 Rd8 46.Bxe4 dxe4 47.h7 e3+ 48.Kh2 e2 49.Qe3 Kb7 50.Qxe2 Bxb2 51.Rg8 Rd5 52.h8=Q Bxh8 53.Rxh8 Rd7 54.Qe5 Ka6 55.Qc5 Kb7 56.Rh6 f6 57.Rxf6 1-0[/pgn]

Very nice, huh? Except it was Wasp who was white I think black on this game is a good representation of what you'd expect to see from Rodent (9...Be6 10...Nb8 11...Bc8 12...Nbd7 ).

I know it has a couple dozen personalities and that some ought to blow me out the water, but I'd just think, what if some previous version of Rodent played as awesome as people praised it for by default, and the personalities would just enhance something already great?

Seeking help from people used to Rodent, do you know what was the last engine version with "the sparkle"?

No my friend..its not so simple..those "Rodent Personalities" need quite a bit of adjustment (adjust the txt file and move around the numbers a bit) Also the personalities need to used with a specific "opening book" Tal uses Tal Book, rodent gets rodent book, attacker get attacking book ect...That should get you closer to the style of play you are seeking...Good Luck

[Ovyron]

I'm not a believer of books for personalities, if a personality is good then it should be good from the opening position, or with minimal books for variety.

It's possible default Stockfish could be made to appear as having a great style with a gambit book that plays an interesting opening no matter what the opponent plays, but that'd be "cheating", specially if the engine doesn't like the positions it's being forced to play.

[BrendanJNorman]

I'm not a believer of books for personalities, if a personality is good then it should be good from the opening position, or with minimal books for variety.

It's possible default Stockfish could be made to appear as having a great style with a gambit book that plays an interesting opening no matter what the opponent plays, but that'd be "cheating", specially if the engine doesn't like the positions it's being forced to play.

It's funny, I was talking to Pawel about this just last night.

I don't agree with you on this, man... Of course, the personality should be noticeable regardless of opening, but it will far less clear and performance much weaker if the "entry" positions don't match the desired style.

If I make a active and dynamic 'Kasparov' personality, and instead of Najdorf Sicilians, I have him playing some cramped French Winawer Defense, he's likely to lose patience, and lash out trying to become "active" and make sub-optimal moves - Just as the REAL Kasparov probably would!

I had somebody email me a year or so about a Karpov personality I'd created...he was complaining that Karpov has lost badly and so I was curious.

So, inspecting the PGN, I noticed that the guy has this positional, "safety-first" personality of Karpov playing razor sharp, chaotic opening lines with both colors.

So the results sucks, the same as they would for REAL Karpov.

You get the point.

Any player, human or otherwise, plays much more poorly (and struggles to show their real style) in positions where they feel uncomfortable.

If one is to make a personality simulating a human GM, it MUST also simulate their opening repertoire...otherwise it's just another engine.

[Ovyron]

Yeah, I don't care much about personalities that emulate some specific human style, at least, other generic personalities, or engines that play awesome chess out-of-the-box are more appealing to me.

And, anyway, it may just be an illusion, try this:

Get a personality for Rodent of some GM, and a personality of ProDeo of the same GM. If you ask the people that have seen the former, they'll say it plays like it. If you ask a group that have seen the latter, they'll say it plays like it.

Now, play the Rodent personality against the ProDeo personality and see how they play completely different! Even though they're supposedly emulating the same player!

So those personalities aren't really playing what that human would have played, those are just playing styles inspired by those players.

An opening book for personalities should only accentuate those personalities and get into positions they play well, but this isn't trivial. Even on the Tactical vs. Positional videos that you sent me, at one point you were scratching your head about some move choices of Rodent Karpov's book, and it was clear Critter 0.52's book didn't aim to reach position that would favor a tactical engine.

Also, OpenTal's book would leave it in positions where it was clear OT was uncomfortable playing. So perhaps you are right, it can be done right, but what I've seen about opening books for personalities leaves a lot to be desired currently, and it's not an easy task.