Komodo 9.1 Results

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

Moderator: Ras

kranium
Posts: 2130
Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 10:43 am

Re: Komodo 9.1 Results

Post by kranium »

Darkmoon wrote:I'm not sure I understand the issue. I'm running Komodo 9.1 on default parameters as I am Stockfish 290615. ponder off.Gambitlines.

I do understand that the match is limited to only 1hr/15sec repeated and cannot be taken seriously.

But at game 58 Komodo is leading albeit by a slim margin of +8=44-6. This has to count for something!

But maybe I am misunderstanding the purport of the argument in the thread.
Hi Robert-

What's wrong with 1hr/15sec repeated?

Using the LOS tool I posted earlier, and inputting your data, we get

games = 58
win% = 0.517241
elo = +11.9853
los = 0.566561

ie. in this instance, the mathematical likelihood that Komodo 9.1 is stronger than SF 290615 is ~57%

Norm
Darkmoon
Posts: 191
Joined: Tue Dec 15, 2009 12:48 am

Re: Komodo 9.1 Results

Post by Darkmoon »

kranium wrote:
Darkmoon wrote:I'm not sure I understand the issue. I'm running Komodo 9.1 on default parameters as I am Stockfish 290615. ponder off.Gambitlines.

I do understand that the match is limited to only 1hr/15sec repeated and cannot be taken seriously.

But at game 58 Komodo is leading albeit by a slim margin of +8=44-6. This has to count for something!

But maybe I am misunderstanding the purport of the argument in the thread.
Hi Robert-

What's wrong with 1hr/15sec repeated?

Using the LOS tool I posted earlier, and inputting your data, we get

games = 58
win% = 0.517241
elo = +11.9853
los = 0.566561

ie. in this instance, the mathematical likelihood that Komodo 9.1 is stronger than SF 290615 is ~57%

Norm
Actually, I didn't think the test very serious at all. On Rybka forum I make that very clear- I was asked to perform the test with Jeroen Noomen book


I noted in discussion here that there was a question of Komodo's being handicapped possibly because of changes made Komodo search depth?!

But my point was that Komodo was running fine or seemingly so -and didn't look like it was running at any particular disadvantage or handicap due to those changes.

However, Stockfish is in this sample test that I was running (note the term sample) is breathing right down Komodo's neck. By the way that was a fast version pick up by the Stockfish team kudos to them.

Now, as you so exactingly put out the sample is ridiculously small and perhaps not enough to show any deleterious effect that change may have caused Komodo in performance. By the way that was supposed to be on going -but I have my doubts as to whether I will continue the testing.

Thank you greatly Norman for the civility of your response. It is appreciated.
shrapnel
Posts: 1339
Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2012 9:43 am
Location: New Delhi, India

Re: Komodo 9.1 Results

Post by shrapnel »

kranium wrote:the mathematical likelihood that Komodo 9.1 is stronger than SF 290615 is ~57%

Norm
Hmm....well, I think latest SF 040715 has just about caught up with Komodo.
Time for you to buckle up, Mark Lefler !
i7 5960X @ 4.1 Ghz, 64 GB G.Skill RipJaws RAM, Twin Asus ROG Strix OC 11 GB Geforce 2080 Tis