mjlef wrote:
Quick question, did you have the full Win Loss Draw plus DTZ 6 piece table bases installed?
Yes. My syzygy folder is 149 GB in total. It has subfolders for dtz, dtz-1, dtz-2, dtz-3, dtz-4, dtz-5 (amongst other folders).
I've been using 6-piece syzygy for a while, including with Komodo 8, etc. and I've never seen a won endgame failing to be progressed. I'll experiment with other engines for the same endgame.
Using Komodo 9.01, I can't reproduce the issue if I just analyse one of the positions from the endgame. I need to step around the game while analysing, in order for it to produce some unconvincing analysis. I think clearing hash helps reduce the chance of reproducing; not sure.
After seeing this in Arena 3.5, I tried Chessbase 12 and was able to reproduce it. After stepping around, I got Kb8 suggested for the following position.
[d]
If I then start from scratch with a new game and paste this position, I see the better Rf4 suggested.
Then opening the complete game again, clicking around move 112 while analysing, and stepping forward a move, and I see moves such as Kb8 or Kb7?!
It is a bit strange since Komodo would normally return a score of +/- 1000 for a known win/loss at the root. the +/-250 score are for wins discovered during the search. Thanks for the positions. I have to reinstall 6 piece Syzygy on something to try and duplicate this behavior.
mjlef wrote:It is a bit strange since Komodo would normally return a score of +/- 1000 for a known win/loss at the root. the +/-250 score are for wins discovered during the search. Thanks for the positions. I have to reinstall 6 piece Syzygy on something to try and duplicate this behavior.
Looking at the game score, during the 6 piece endgame, Komodo was usually using 250 or 318. I know that syzygy is different from Nalimov tablebases, but what is the expectation in terms of playing out won positions? Should Komodo play an optimal line every time or just something close enough to it?
Further experimenting with analysing the game, and I'm seeing that it is quite unpredicatable. Open game; start Komodo as kibitzer; click on 112.Rf6... then combinations of step forward and back; sometimes clearing hash inbetween. Sometimes, after 112...Ra1, I see Rf4 or Rf5, Rc6, Kb7, Kb8. All maintain the win but not equal distance according to shredderchess.com.
mjlef wrote:It is a bit strange since Komodo would normally return a score of +/- 1000 for a known win/loss at the root. the +/-250 score are for wins discovered during the search. Thanks for the positions. I have to reinstall 6 piece Syzygy on something to try and duplicate this behavior.
Analysis mode in xboard with 4 core i& iMac. On my machine Komoko was seeing 17.9M nps.
mjlef wrote:It is a bit strange since Komodo would normally return a score of +/- 1000 for a known win/loss at the root. the +/-250 score are for wins discovered during the search. Thanks for the positions. I have to reinstall 6 piece Syzygy on something to try and duplicate this behavior.
Looking at the game score, during the 6 piece endgame, Komodo was usually using 250 or 318. I know that syzygy is different from Nalimov tablebases, but what is the expectation in terms of playing out won positions? Should Komodo play an optimal line every time or just something close enough to it?
Further experimenting with analysing the game, and I'm seeing that it is quite unpredicatable. Open game; start Komodo as kibitzer; click on 112.Rf6... then combinations of step forward and back; sometimes clearing hash inbetween. Sometimes, after 112...Ra1, I see Rf4 or Rf5, Rc6, Kb7, Kb8. All maintain the win but not equal distance according to shredderchess.com.
Syzygy do not have distance to win (or loss or draw). They use two sets of tables. One has an indication if the position will lead to a win, a loss or a draw with perfect play. The second table (DTZ) indicates how many moves to a conversion (a capture, a loss, a draw a win..). So, there is not enough information to play perfectly. Once a program gets down to a 6 piece engine, it should be able to at least play the move(s) that lead to the fastest conversion. Once it converts, it does the same thing. But this leads to kinda weird play where the program often makes strange looking (but equally good in terms of moves to conversion) moves. One way to get "better looking" moves is to combine the root move lookup with some searching. But even with these kinds of additions, the move selection can still seem a bit strange. Not that full move to win tablebases are much larger and not fast enough on present machines to be used very deep in the search. Even ram drives are nowhere near the search speeds of current programs. The Syzygy scheme is a clever compromise to shrink the data enough to be useful.
So saying this, I am not the expert on Syzygy. I will ask Jeremy to take a look (he added the Syzygy TB to Komodo).
Hi Mark
I saw someone using an Engine called Komodo 9.2 RC or something like that yesterday in the Infinity Chess engine Room.
When will your loyal customers get the update ?
shrapnel wrote:Hi Mark
I saw someone using an Engine called Komodo 9.2 RC or something like that yesterday in the Infinity Chess engine Room.
When will your loyal customers get the update ?
I have not made a Komodo 9.2 RC, so I am unsure where that name is coming from. We sometimes give copies to some testers to test, of course, and help us know if a version is an actual improvement. Changes of a few elo take many thousands of games, and we do not plan on releasing anything until we are convinced it is a significant improvement, or the release fixes some bug or issue. For bug fix releases, the timing will depend on how many people it effects or how bag the bug is. For strength improvements, we have a target of about 10 elo better than the last release.
Note the Komodo 9.01 update does help quite a bit in sudden death (no increment) play, but changes nothing for increment play.
shrapnel wrote:Hi Mark
I saw someone using an Engine called Komodo 9.2 RC or something like that yesterday in the Infinity Chess engine Room.
When will your loyal customers get the update ?
I have not made a Komodo 9.2 RC, so I am unsure where that name is coming from. We sometimes give copies to some testers to test, of course, and help us know if a version is an actual improvement. Changes of a few elo take many thousands of games, and we do not plan on releasing anything until we are convinced it is a significant improvement, or the release fixes some bug or issue. For bug fix releases, the timing will depend on how many people it effects or how bag the bug is. For strength improvements, we have a target of about 10 elo better than the last release.
Note the Komodo 9.01 update does help quite a bit in sudden death (no increment) play, but changes nothing for increment play.
Thanks for the quick response.
Well, it seemed genuine at the time because the player using it had a high Rating and the letters "RC" seemed to indicate it was a Release Candidate. Maybe some joker with a Hex Editor.
Thank You