I'm disappointed with Stockfish dev.

[Sopel]

[
(Of course the point remains that absolute certainty does not exist. But let's wait for Cornfed to enlighten us on how to make the mathematically impossible possible.)

Dude, nothing is 100% certain. Just stop it with the straw-man.

Hey, you were the wishcraft guy... Did you lose it?

What about to simply re-insert a much improved Contempt option to avoid that a ThreadRipper 128 threads boosted SF hitting 75 MN/s often draws against Raspberry-P3 SF calculating only 79 kN/s?

sounds like an easy change, I'm sure you can find one of the 30 or so stockfish clone developers competent enough to implement it in their engine

[DrEinstein]

[
(Of course the point remains that absolute certainty does not exist. But let's wait for Cornfed to enlighten us on how to make the mathematically impossible possible.)

Dude, nothing is 100% certain. Just stop it with the straw-man.

Hey, you were the wishcraft guy... Did you lose it?

What about to simply re-insert a much improved Contempt option to avoid that a ThreadRipper 128 threads boosted SF hitting 75 MN/s often draws against Raspberry-P3 SF calculating only 79 kN/s?

sounds like an easy change, I'm sure you can find one of the 30 or so stockfish clone developers competent enough to implement it in their engine

You are one of these 30 developers (FT), and certainly competent enough, so go ahead!
Or do you think I should do it instead and make 'optimism' somehow adjustable in the uci-options?

[Sopel]

[
(Of course the point remains that absolute certainty does not exist. But let's wait for Cornfed to enlighten us on how to make the mathematically impossible possible.)

Dude, nothing is 100% certain. Just stop it with the straw-man.

Hey, you were the wishcraft guy... Did you lose it?

What about to simply re-insert a much improved Contempt option to avoid that a ThreadRipper 128 threads boosted SF hitting 75 MN/s often draws against Raspberry-P3 SF calculating only 79 kN/s?

sounds like an easy change, I'm sure you can find one of the 30 or so stockfish clone developers competent enough to implement it in their engine

You are one of these 30 developers (FT), and certainly competent enough, so go ahead!
Or do you think I should do it instead and make 'optimism' somehow adjustable in the uci-options?

I'm definitely not competent enough. Sorry.

[AlexChess]

[
(Of course the point remains that absolute certainty does not exist. But let's wait for Cornfed to enlighten us on how to make the mathematically impossible possible.)

Dude, nothing is 100% certain. Just stop it with the straw-man.

Hey, you were the wishcraft guy... Did you lose it?

What about to simply re-insert a much improved Contempt option to avoid that a ThreadRipper 128 threads boosted SF hitting 75 MN/s often draws against Raspberry-P3 SF calculating only 79 kN/s?

sounds like an easy change, I'm sure you can find one of the 30 or so stockfish clone developers competent enough to implement it in their engine

You are one of these 30 developers (FT), and certainly competent enough, so go ahead!
Or do you think I should do it instead and make 'optimism' somehow adjustable in the uci-options?

I'm definitely not competent enough. Sorry.

I've re-added it to ProteusSF since months and it helps to avoid draws, I was suggesting this for Stockfish-dev itself. They are the edge of programmers (Sopel included, I can't wait his next NNUEs) and they should use every mhz of top hardwares, adding a feature to force a win even taking some risks. It's the best engine obvioulsly and draw means perfect chess knowledge, but isn't normal that a 10.000$ ThreadRipper doesn't score 95% against a 60$ Raspberry-P3. PS ...Right now I'm studying Berserk 11.1 contempt performance

[DrEinstein]

Now I'm completely confused. The SFdevs first deleted contempt, apparently because it doesn't work well (or at all?) with NNUEs, then they introduced optimism:

https://github.com/official-stockfish/S ... d32bb351c3

which seems pretty easy to be tweaked with an uci-parameter, let's say from -50 to 50, and now the two posts from Sopel and Alexchess...

[noobpwnftw]

So there are a million parameters in NNUE and a few hundred parameters scattered around the SF code, why don't you add them to UCI options too?

Oh, I forgot, you have no idea how to come up with good values. In fact, you don't seem to know if anything is good or bad at all, according to your previous theories for testing things.

[DrEinstein]

So there are a million parameters in NNUE and a few hundred parameters scattered around the SF code, why don't you add them to UCI options too?

Oh, I forgot, you have no idea how to come up with good values. In fact, you don't seem to know if anything is good or bad at all, according to your previous theories for testing things.

This is your answer or question to whom?
I didn't say I will add any parameter, I only said it would be easy to do.

[DrEinstein]

Humorless people posting confusing things, not a good place to spend too much time. I'm not disappointed at all with stock Stockfish, so I'll better leave this thread now, and forever.

[syzygy]

Now I'm completely confused. The SFdevs first deleted contempt, apparently because it doesn't work well (or at all?) with NNUEs, then they introduced optimism:

https://github.com/official-stockfish/S ... d32bb351c3

which seems pretty easy to be tweaked with an uci-parameter, let's say from -50 to 50, and now the two posts from Sopel and Alexchess...

If it improves play against itself, why make it a parameter?

[DrEinstein]

Now I'm completely confused. The SFdevs first deleted contempt, apparently because it doesn't work well (or at all?) with NNUEs, then they introduced optimism:

https://github.com/official-stockfish/S ... d32bb351c3

which seems pretty easy to be tweaked with an uci-parameter, let's say from -50 to 50, and now the two posts from Sopel and Alexchess...

If it improves play against itself, why make it a parameter?

I don't want to make optimism a parameter, I only was thinking, obviously too loud, about adjusting snicolet's optimism somehow and very carefully by an uci-parameter, in such a way, that SF's playing strength against weaker opponents is improved. I assume that this should be possible. But I won't try it by myself. Don't have the testing possibilities for such a project LOL
BTW: Default setting of this hypothetical parameter would certainly be 0, if range is from -50 to 50.