Brainfish, a new concept of a chess engine
Posted: Mon Jul 25, 2016 3:16 am
Hello together,
today I released Brainfish, which realizes a new concept of a chess engine, the unification of an opening book and the engine. Brainfish ist build upon Stockfish, therefore it is of course under the GPL license and the source code is available. The additional parts are not StockFish dependant and would work in every engine.
Unification means, that the book is not created with statistics or human configuration, but is completely generated from the engine itself, like a grandmaster may think of how to play some opening lines before a game. The book is contained in the exe itself, to demonstrate the unity of both.
So when Brainfish makes a move from it's internal opening library, there is in fact still Stockfish playing, but with a much higher precision and depth than normally possible. The libray extends in many cases into the deep middlegame and also into the endgame. If Brainfish is out of his book, it plays identical to Stockfish.
Brainfish is a spinoff of a Library called Cerebellum (not yet released) for the deep Analysis of chess Positions and complete opening trees. It contains the one or two best moves per position from Cerebellum. So BrainFish can be regarded as the playing part of that Library. BrainFish can also handle transpostions and graph interactions in his library, which is one of it's main advantages. There may be some similarities with IDeA, but I don't know enough of IDeA to compare them directly.
How can BrainFish be compared to other Engines?
That's a bit difficult, because BrainFish is in fact not just another Engine or a Stockfish clone with a different playing style. It add's something new to an engine, a self generated playing book (playing book because it can handle also middle and endgames). So the increase in playing strength can be directly measured, but the difference does not mean the same as when comparing two standard engines. It's more like building the strongest possible chess playing entity, no matter how it works internally.
How does it compare to Stockfish with a good standard opening book?
Brainfish should already play better than most or perhaps any Stockfish + opening book combination, but there's not enough statistical evidence so far. The main advantage of BrainFish is that it plays better every day when adding new nodes and recalculating the graph.
The graph algorithm always recalculates the whole tree, that means adding an endgame postion can change what BrainFish plays in the first moves.
BrainFish Website: www.zipproth.de/BrainFish
Stefan Pohls Testing site: http://spcc.beepworld.de/index.htm
Thomas
today I released Brainfish, which realizes a new concept of a chess engine, the unification of an opening book and the engine. Brainfish ist build upon Stockfish, therefore it is of course under the GPL license and the source code is available. The additional parts are not StockFish dependant and would work in every engine.
Unification means, that the book is not created with statistics or human configuration, but is completely generated from the engine itself, like a grandmaster may think of how to play some opening lines before a game. The book is contained in the exe itself, to demonstrate the unity of both.
So when Brainfish makes a move from it's internal opening library, there is in fact still Stockfish playing, but with a much higher precision and depth than normally possible. The libray extends in many cases into the deep middlegame and also into the endgame. If Brainfish is out of his book, it plays identical to Stockfish.
Brainfish is a spinoff of a Library called Cerebellum (not yet released) for the deep Analysis of chess Positions and complete opening trees. It contains the one or two best moves per position from Cerebellum. So BrainFish can be regarded as the playing part of that Library. BrainFish can also handle transpostions and graph interactions in his library, which is one of it's main advantages. There may be some similarities with IDeA, but I don't know enough of IDeA to compare them directly.
How can BrainFish be compared to other Engines?
That's a bit difficult, because BrainFish is in fact not just another Engine or a Stockfish clone with a different playing style. It add's something new to an engine, a self generated playing book (playing book because it can handle also middle and endgames). So the increase in playing strength can be directly measured, but the difference does not mean the same as when comparing two standard engines. It's more like building the strongest possible chess playing entity, no matter how it works internally.
How does it compare to Stockfish with a good standard opening book?
Brainfish should already play better than most or perhaps any Stockfish + opening book combination, but there's not enough statistical evidence so far. The main advantage of BrainFish is that it plays better every day when adding new nodes and recalculating the graph.
The graph algorithm always recalculates the whole tree, that means adding an endgame postion can change what BrainFish plays in the first moves.
BrainFish Website: www.zipproth.de/BrainFish
Stefan Pohls Testing site: http://spcc.beepworld.de/index.htm
Thomas
