Page 5 of 10

Re: OKE - Opening Knowledge Engines

Posted: Tue Jun 11, 2019 8:17 pm
by Guenther
Dann Corbit wrote:
Tue Jun 11, 2019 7:52 pm
Guenther wrote:
Tue Jun 11, 2019 6:43 pm
Dann Corbit wrote:
Tue Jun 11, 2019 6:35 pm
Guenther wrote:
Tue Jun 11, 2019 5:29 pm
1. you need to start later in the opening
I think it is completely irrelevant where you start. A fully closed position is difficult, like locked positions, but some computers can find good answers.
It is totally relevant because with only 2! up to 4 moves you are left with much too much equal moves, which are just a matter of taste/style.
2-4 moves is the current discussion for OKE, it is incomprehensible for me how you can dispute about this.
The whole discussion lacks of logic as most threads here, thus I leave it here.
Most chess positions have 2 to 4 good choices.

...
You completely missunderstood. We are talking about move choices after 2-4 moves not about 2-4 move choices, sigh...

Re: OKE - Opening Knowledge Engines

Posted: Tue Jun 11, 2019 8:27 pm
by Dann Corbit
My programs emit this:
rnbqkbnr/pppppppp/8/8/8/8/PPPPPPPP/RNBQKBNR w KQkq - bm c4=10; e4=9; d4=9; Nf3=6; e3=3; g3=3;

Re: OKE - Opening Knowledge Engines

Posted: Tue Jun 11, 2019 8:28 pm
by Dann Corbit
Guenther wrote:
Tue Jun 11, 2019 8:17 pm
Dann Corbit wrote:
Tue Jun 11, 2019 7:52 pm
Guenther wrote:
Tue Jun 11, 2019 6:43 pm
Dann Corbit wrote:
Tue Jun 11, 2019 6:35 pm
Guenther wrote:
Tue Jun 11, 2019 5:29 pm
1. you need to start later in the opening
I think it is completely irrelevant where you start. A fully closed position is difficult, like locked positions, but some computers can find good answers.
It is totally relevant because with only 2! up to 4 moves you are left with much too much equal moves, which are just a matter of taste/style.
2-4 moves is the current discussion for OKE, it is incomprehensible for me how you can dispute about this.
The whole discussion lacks of logic as most threads here, thus I leave it here.
Most chess positions have 2 to 4 good choices.

...
You completely missunderstood. We are talking about move choices after 2-4 moves not about 2-4 move choices, sigh...
One of us has completely misunderstood.

Re: OKE - Opening Knowledge Engines

Posted: Tue Jun 11, 2019 8:39 pm
by noobpwnftw
I have built a database using a slightly modified SF to adjust MultiPV depending on shallow search results.
It now has about 2 billion unique positions, each analyzed with depth >=22 and MultiPV >=5, my experience is that eventually which engine or parameters you use becomes irrelevant - it converges to statistics sooner or later.
One thing important to avoid is "double" selection bias: human games or most game sets are not well distributed among all openings.

Re: OKE - Opening Knowledge Engines

Posted: Tue Jun 11, 2019 8:40 pm
by Dann Corbit
Only two positions in the EPD files actually have valid e.p. tags.



All the others are spurious. Because of this, there are more than 1380 duplicates in the file.
About 18% are duplicates.

Re: OKE - Opening Knowledge Engines

Posted: Tue Jun 11, 2019 8:44 pm
by Dann Corbit
This one is strange, it is a mate in 2:

Qh4+ g3 Qxg3#

It's a variant on the fool's mate.

Re: OKE - Opening Knowledge Engines

Posted: Tue Jun 11, 2019 8:50 pm
by Dann Corbit
noobpwnftw wrote:
Tue Jun 11, 2019 8:39 pm
I have built a database using a slightly modified SF to adjust MultiPV depending on shallow search results.
It now has about 2 billion unique positions, each analyzed with depth >=22 and MultiPV >=5, my experience is that eventually which engine or parameters you use becomes irrelevant - it converges to statistics sooner or later.
One thing important to avoid is "double" selection bias: human games or most game sets are not well distributed among all openings.
With over a billion positions analyzed, you can backsolve.
The depth value at the root will be approximately 22 + distance to leaf, (unless the root depth is already greater than this).

Re: OKE - Opening Knowledge Engines

Posted: Tue Jun 11, 2019 9:00 pm
by noobpwnftw
The depth value at the root will be approximately 22 + (distance to leaf).
Indeed, but there is still a horizon problem, although the chances of getting something wrong diminishes when depth goes higher.
The search breadth should be considerably wider than vanilla search from root position due to MultiPV at each child.
I use averaging back-propagation of engine eval to refine statistics of each move.

Re: OKE - Opening Knowledge Engines

Posted: Tue Jun 11, 2019 9:04 pm
by Dann Corbit
noobpwnftw wrote:
Tue Jun 11, 2019 9:00 pm
The depth value at the root will be approximately 22 + (distance to leaf).
Indeed, but there is still a horizon problem, although the chances of getting something wrong diminishes when depth goes higher.
The search breadth should be considerably wider than vanilla search from root position due to MultiPV at each child.
I use averaging back-propagation of engine eval to refine statistics of each move.
Have you done this for European chess or only for Xianqui?
I guess it would make a book that would destroy the Cerebellum version.

Re: OKE - Opening Knowledge Engines

Posted: Tue Jun 11, 2019 9:10 pm
by noobpwnftw
Dann Corbit wrote:
Tue Jun 11, 2019 9:04 pm
noobpwnftw wrote:
Tue Jun 11, 2019 9:00 pm
The depth value at the root will be approximately 22 + (distance to leaf).
Indeed, but there is still a horizon problem, although the chances of getting something wrong diminishes when depth goes higher.
The search breadth should be considerably wider than vanilla search from root position due to MultiPV at each child.
I use averaging back-propagation of engine eval to refine statistics of each move.
Have you done this for European chess or only for Xianqui?
I guess it would make a book that would destroy the Cerebellum version.
I have done both, although I have yet to make an user interface for Chess - online probing via API is already available.