
https://www.chess.com/blog/the_real_gre ... ine-part-i
Moderator: Ras
Welcome back Bob.bob wrote: ↑Sat May 04, 2019 7:41 pm Not sure this is "news". In the early 80's, I might win one out of 100 games against Cray Blitz, yet our ratings were pretty equal in terms of USCF. 5 years later, that was zero out of 100. Been that way all the way through current Crafty. It is really easy to develop an engine that beats you trivially. I remember an old Star Trek episode where Spock proved the computer in the Enterprise had been tampered with because he beat the chess program he supposedly wrote, in several successive games. He stated "the best I should be able to achieve is a draw." We now know that kind of "logic" was badly flawed.And still is.
Looks like hardware improvements turned the old simplistic search approach into a super-GM, and it now seems that the ANN programs are now beginning to reap the same benefits in terms of massively parallel GPU cards, so that the old issues that killed them (speed related and training data sizes) is now a non-issue.
I'm not convinced ANN programs will ever really surpass the traditional alpha/beta algorithm, with any significant margin, but it might end up being just as good...
I think i can still maybe draw my Pulsar engine at it's hardest level. It only got up to about 2600 ICC Blitz. But for analysis of users Pulsar games in my App Pulsar Chess Engine for iOS, i'm using Crafty which i think is over 500 rating points stronger or more on computer list than Pulsar. And in my view while not Stockfish and i'm even a few versions behind modern Crafty, it's strong GM strength per the rating for the version i'm using, about 2700 computer rating I found when i Googled the version. Current at the time was nearly 3000.bob wrote: ↑Sat May 04, 2019 7:41 pm Not sure this is "news". In the early 80's, I might win one out of 100 games against Cray Blitz, yet our ratings were pretty equal in terms of USCF. 5 years later, that was zero out of 100. Been that way all the way through current Crafty. It is really easy to develop an engine that beats you trivially.
Bob Hyatt, the Crafty author, was a pioneer of parallel computing.
I wish to make a distinction between going down an unproven path that nobody has done before, and doing something that has been done before. The former is uncertain and risky and coming out the other side with something functional is the creative achievement and the creative process.adams161 wrote: ↑Sun May 05, 2019 12:35 pmBob Hyatt, the Crafty author, was a pioneer of parallel computing.
Myself when i started Pulsar didn't have much claim to fame i was not following a recipes. But I wanted to do something different so I made a game plex. Pulsar for iOS and Android plays Chess, Atomic, Crazyhouse, Three Checks, Loser's Chess and Giveaway. And i spent time with all of them working on how to teach the chess code to play variants. I did start with chess code some parts stripped out.
So i think there is different types of creation even if following an area others are working in.