I wonder what is the thinking game that engines earn most elo from doubling the speed

[Uri Blass]

In chess the gain from doubling the speed was in the past something like 70 elo but engines became stronger and today top engines earn almost 0 elo points from doubling the speed.

I wonder if top engines earn today more from doubling the speed in go
I guess that engines may earn more elo from doubling the speed in games that are similiar to chess if you change the rules to have no draws in chess or if you increase the number of ranks in the board.

[chrisw]

In chess the gain from doubling the speed was in the past something like 70 elo but engines became stronger and today top engines earn almost 0 elo points from doubling the speed.

I wonder if top engines earn today more from doubling the speed in go
I guess that engines may earn more elo from doubling the speed in games that are similiar to chess if you change the rules to have no draws in chess or if you increase the number of ranks in the board.

Is this even a question? Obviously those games that become more complex with depth. Shogi would be a good example.

[syzygy]

In chess the gain from doubling the speed was in the past something like 70 elo but engines became stronger and today top engines earn almost 0 elo points from doubling the speed.

Doubling the speed is equivalent to doubling time control.
If you believe giving the engine double the time is not going to make it find better moves, then you should indeed believe that doubling the speed is not going to make it find better moves. Then you can also halve the time control without any loss in strength, and again, and again, and again, etc.

Of course if the engine is already thinking long enough (at a given speed) for playing nearly perfectly, then further Elo gains from doubling time/speed will necessarily be limited. This applies to any game.

[hgm]

Indeed, the question can only relate to the slope of the Elo-vs-thinkingTime curve at the origin. Asymptotically there will always be an upper limit to this curve when the thinking time is large enough to solve the game.

[chrisw]

In chess the gain from doubling the speed was in the past something like 70 elo but engines became stronger and today top engines earn almost 0 elo points from doubling the speed.

Doubling the speed is equivalent to doubling time control.
If you believe giving the engine double the time is not going to make it find better moves, then you should indeed believe that doubling the speed is not going to make it find better moves. Then you can also halve the time control without any loss in strength, and again, and again, and again, etc.

Of course if the engine is already thinking long enough (at a given speed) for playing nearly perfectly, then further Elo gains from doubling time/speed will necessarily be limited. This applies to any game.

Another way to think about this is to consider the opportunities to change its mind about a move. At increasing nominal depth, or increasing move time allowance, iteration count, whatever, the rate of mind change opportunities per unit time decreases towards zero. Hence potential Elo gain possibility with time also decreases to zero. This effect will be true for all games with an expanding search tree.

[Uri Blass]

In chess the gain from doubling the speed was in the past something like 70 elo but engines became stronger and today top engines earn almost 0 elo points from doubling the speed.

I wonder if top engines earn today more from doubling the speed in go
I guess that engines may earn more elo from doubling the speed in games that are similiar to chess if you change the rules to have no draws in chess or if you increase the number of ranks in the board.

Is this even a question? Obviously those games that become more complex with depth. Shogi would be a good example.

I am not sure and in theory a complex game may be so complex that even when you double the time engines still have no idea who is going to win.

For example engines play 20 chess moves and white is the winner if perft(50) of the final position is even and black is winning if perft(50) of the final position is odd.

Here we even practically cannot know the winner after the game is finished ,
but it is possible with a similiar idea that we can find the winner, but finding the winner may take 24 hours of search that the engines do not have during the game.

[chrisw]

In chess the gain from doubling the speed was in the past something like 70 elo but engines became stronger and today top engines earn almost 0 elo points from doubling the speed.

I wonder if top engines earn today more from doubling the speed in go
I guess that engines may earn more elo from doubling the speed in games that are similiar to chess if you change the rules to have no draws in chess or if you increase the number of ranks in the board.

Is this even a question? Obviously those games that become more complex with depth. Shogi would be a good example.

I am not sure and in theory a complex game may be so complex that even when you double the time engines still have no idea who is going to win.

This is kind of ridiculous word salads.
If you double the time IT IS MORE LIKELY the engine is able to a better eval of the status of the position.

For example engines play 20 chess moves and white is the winner if perft(50) of the final position is even and black is winning if perft(50) of the final position is odd.

This is kind of pointless.
Perft(50) gives a result only if there were no pawns/captures. Otherwise you are left with the eval. We all know this already.

Here we even practically cannot know the winner after the game is finished ,
but it is possible with a similiar idea that we can find the winner, but finding the winner may take 24 hours of search that the engines do not have during the game.

And, so, your point is?

[Dann Corbit]

I guess that my not very interesting answer is "the game with the lowest branching factor" and that is just a guess since I did not test it.

[Uri Blass]

In chess the gain from doubling the speed was in the past something like 70 elo but engines became stronger and today top engines earn almost 0 elo points from doubling the speed.

I wonder if top engines earn today more from doubling the speed in go
I guess that engines may earn more elo from doubling the speed in games that are similiar to chess if you change the rules to have no draws in chess or if you increase the number of ranks in the board.

Is this even a question? Obviously those games that become more complex with depth. Shogi would be a good example.

I am not sure and in theory a complex game may be so complex that even when you double the time engines still have no idea who is going to win.

This is kind of ridiculous word salads.
If you double the time IT IS MORE LIKELY the engine is able to a better eval of the status of the position.

For example engines play 20 chess moves and white is the winner if perft(50) of the final position is even and black is winning if perft(50) of the final position is odd.

This is kind of pointless.
Perft(50) gives a result only if there were no pawns/captures. Otherwise you are left with the eval. We all know this already.

Here we even practically cannot know the winner after the game is finished ,
but it is possible with a similiar idea that we can find the winner, but finding the winner may take 24 hours of search that the engines do not have during the game.

And, so, your point is?

My point is that it is possible to have a game when the engines know the rules of the game but calculating the result of the game takes so much time that practically the time is not important for rating for a reasonable time control(if the engines know only that the game is finished after 20 moves and calculating who won take 24 hours then they can earn no rating points from the fact that they have 2 hours for all moves instead of 1 hour for all moves).

[chrisw]

In chess the gain from doubling the speed was in the past something like 70 elo but engines became stronger and today top engines earn almost 0 elo points from doubling the speed.

I wonder if top engines earn today more from doubling the speed in go
I guess that engines may earn more elo from doubling the speed in games that are similiar to chess if you change the rules to have no draws in chess or if you increase the number of ranks in the board.

Is this even a question? Obviously those games that become more complex with depth. Shogi would be a good example.

I am not sure and in theory a complex game may be so complex that even when you double the time engines still have no idea who is going to win.

This is kind of ridiculous word salads.
If you double the time IT IS MORE LIKELY the engine is able to a better eval of the status of the position.

For example engines play 20 chess moves and white is the winner if perft(50) of the final position is even and black is winning if perft(50) of the final position is odd.

This is kind of pointless.
Perft(50) gives a result only if there were no pawns/captures. Otherwise you are left with the eval. We all know this already.

Here we even practically cannot know the winner after the game is finished ,
but it is possible with a similiar idea that we can find the winner, but finding the winner may take 24 hours of search that the engines do not have during the game.

And, so, your point is?

My point is that it is possible to have a game when the engines know the rules of the game but calculating the result of the game takes so much time that practically the time is not important for rating for a reasonable time control(if the engines know only that the game is finished after 20 moves and calculating who won take 24 hours then they can earn no rating points from the fact that they have 2 hours for all moves instead of 1 hour for all moves).

The earning of rating points is a statistical thing. More time = more likely to find a better move. Sometimes will and sometimes won’t, but more likely will with more time. Isn’t this kind of obvious?