Doubling of time control
Conditions:
1 Core, 128 MB Hash, 3000 games, 1500 opening positions, no ponder, no learning, no tablebases
GUI: Cutechess-Cli
Hardware:
Intel i5-750 @ 3.5 GHz
Engine:
Komodo 9.3, default settings
Download PDF:
http://fastgm.de/K93-Doubling-TC.pdf
Time in seconds
Doubling of time control
Moderators: hgm, Rebel, chrisw
-
- Posts: 12566
- Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 8:57 pm
- Location: Redmond, WA USA
Re: Doubling of time control
This testing clearly shows a fundamental flaw in the Elo model.
The engine does not get weaker at long time control but stronger.
When given an hour to think, compared to one second, the move chosen with more time allowed will clearly be a much better move.
The increase in draws probably just shows that more careful chess is played by both sides at slower time control.
The engine does not get weaker at long time control but stronger.
When given an hour to think, compared to one second, the move chosen with more time allowed will clearly be a much better move.
The increase in draws probably just shows that more careful chess is played by both sides at slower time control.
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: 10948
- Joined: Wed Jul 26, 2006 10:21 pm
- Full name: Kai Laskos
Re: Doubling of time control
Important post, thank you, I will look at it more carefully today. This is the reference now to the doubling of time control.
-
- Posts: 4052
- Joined: Thu May 15, 2008 9:57 pm
- Location: Berlin, Germany
- Full name: Sven Schüle
Re: Doubling of time control
The reported Elo ratings are the rating differences between the engine with double time and the engine with normal time. It is just the differences that become smaller.Dann Corbit wrote:This testing clearly shows a fundamental flaw in the Elo model.
The engine does not get weaker at long time control but stronger.
When given an hour to think, compared to one second, the move chosen with more time allowed will clearly be a much better move.
The increase in draws probably just shows that more careful chess is played by both sides at slower time control.
Based on the table above you get the following ratings if you transform "double time" into "same time but double speed" (@Kai: is the following correct?):
Code: Select all
Speed Elo
1 0
2 144
4 277
8 389
16 490
32 583
64 656
128 715
256 766
-
- Posts: 4622
- Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 6:33 am
- Location: Regensburg, Germany
- Full name: Guenther Simon
Re: Doubling of time control
Average ply depth would be interesting for this table too, if it could be extracted.Laskos wrote:Important post, thank you, I will look at it more carefully today. This is the reference now to the doubling of time control.
-
- Posts: 818
- Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2013 6:57 pm
Re: Doubling of time control
The ply depth for each move is saved in the pgn-file, for example: 14. Bh3 {+0.33/27 191s}
Is there a tool that extracts the average ply depth from a pgn?
Is there a tool that extracts the average ply depth from a pgn?
-
- Posts: 10948
- Joined: Wed Jul 26, 2006 10:21 pm
- Full name: Kai Laskos
Re: Doubling of time control
If there are no such tools, you could ask via personal message Ferdinand Mosca, he helped me many times with similar quests. He writes python scripts, and also builds executables. Very easy to use. You might explain to him the importance of your work by pointing to this thread.fastgm wrote:The ply depth for each move is saved in the pgn-file, for example: 14. Bh3 {+0.33/27 191s}
Is there a tool that extracts the average ply depth from a pgn?
-
- Posts: 10948
- Joined: Wed Jul 26, 2006 10:21 pm
- Full name: Kai Laskos
Re: Doubling of time control
Yes, numbers seem correct, and it's good to have the total ELO. Also, to have relation to CCRL 40/40' rating, I wrote it next to the last data point, where it stands on time control:Sven Schüle wrote:The reported Elo ratings are the rating differences between the engine with double time and the engine with normal time. It is just the differences that become smaller.Dann Corbit wrote:This testing clearly shows a fundamental flaw in the Elo model.
The engine does not get weaker at long time control but stronger.
When given an hour to think, compared to one second, the move chosen with more time allowed will clearly be a much better move.
The increase in draws probably just shows that more careful chess is played by both sides at slower time control.
Based on the table above you get the following ratings if you transform "double time" into "same time but double speed" (@Kai: is the following correct?):
Of course the strength of the "Speed = 1" engine is already quite high so this can't be used for weaker engines the same way.Code: Select all
Speed Elo 1 0 2 144 4 277 8 389 16 490 32 583 64 656 128 715 256 766
Code: Select all
Speed Elo
1 0
2 144
4 277
8 389
16 490
32 583
64 656
128 715
256 766 CCRL 40/40' 3260
-
- Posts: 1339
- Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2012 9:43 am
- Location: New Delhi, India
Re: Doubling of time control
I've been crying myself hoarse for the last few years that testing through Blitz/STC games is NO SUBSTITUTE for testing through LTC games.Dann Corbit wrote:This testing clearly shows a fundamental flaw in the Elo model.
The engine does not get weaker at long time control but stronger.
When given an hour to think, compared to one second, the move chosen with more time allowed will clearly be a much better move.
The increase in draws probably just shows that more careful chess is played by both sides at slower time control.
Glad to be vindicated.
Its not just a matter of engines being "more careful"....LTC games ruthlessly expose any weakness in the Evaluation and Search patterns of the Engine.
That is why in the TCEC, Houdini winning the Rapids is no guarantee that it will beat SF in the super-final ( though I hope it does, just to discomfit Adam ).
Adam has a point though, when he says that the Super-Final will be a different kind of ballgame.
Houdini can win only if it is REALLY the better Engine.
i7 5960X @ 4.1 Ghz, 64 GB G.Skill RipJaws RAM, Twin Asus ROG Strix OC 11 GB Geforce 2080 Tis
-
- Posts: 10413
- Joined: Thu Mar 09, 2006 12:37 am
- Location: Tel-Aviv Israel
Re: Doubling of time control
I believe that difference between rapid TCEC and slow time control TCEC is small and we do not have enough games.shrapnel wrote:I've been crying myself hoarse for the last few years that testing through Blitz/STC games is NO SUBSTITUTE for testing through LTC games.Dann Corbit wrote:This testing clearly shows a fundamental flaw in the Elo model.
The engine does not get weaker at long time control but stronger.
When given an hour to think, compared to one second, the move chosen with more time allowed will clearly be a much better move.
The increase in draws probably just shows that more careful chess is played by both sides at slower time control.
Glad to be vindicated.
Its not just a matter of engines being "more careful"....LTC games ruthlessly expose any weakness in the Evaluation and Search patterns of the Engine.
That is why in the TCEC, Houdini winning the Rapids is no guarantee that it will beat SF in the super-final ( though I hope it does, just to discomfit Adam ).
Adam has a point though, when he says that the Super-Final will be a different kind of ballgame.
Houdini can win only if it is REALLY the better Engine.
Conditions are also not the same in long and rapid time control because in rapid time control there are many weak opponents.
Rapid TCEC is clearly slower time control than blitz espacially when you consider the number of cores and is clearly slower than the time controls in this thread.