Auto/Tactical analysis with Komodo MTCS

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

Moderators: hgm, Dann Corbit, Harvey Williamson

Forum rules
This textbox is used to restore diagrams posted with the [d] tag before the upgrade.
Post Reply
leavenfish
Posts: 282
Joined: Mon Sep 02, 2013 6:23 am

Auto/Tactical analysis with Komodo MTCS

Post by leavenfish » Sat Nov 02, 2019 7:42 pm

Chessbase has a 'Tactical Analysis' feature. While one would think about any engine would work as good as another as features seem to be preset, I am wondering how Komodo MTCS would fare vs say Komodo regular as concerns their analysis of an existing game.

I ask because when you set Tactical Analysis to go with regular Komodo or Stockfish, the GUI automatically displays 2 lines. I wonder if setting K-MCTS to 2 or 3 lines at about 4 core would actually produce 'better' results than a regular A/B engine?

Using something like the Fritz GUI which offers more analysis might even show better results for MCTS?

I am currently having MCTS analyse a blitz game I just played and so I have no data to look at myself and was wondering if anyone else had done this or had opinions on the merits of MCTS in such analysis - Tactical Analysis set to about 7 or 8 sec a move or Fritz GUI game auto-analysis.

leavenfish
Posts: 282
Joined: Mon Sep 02, 2013 6:23 am

Re: Auto/Tactical analysis with Komodo MTCS

Post by leavenfish » Sun Nov 03, 2019 4:46 pm

I probably should not have tried this on a mere 3 min game because an engine will find so many 'errors' (not optimal move anyway) in them, but there is a definite difference in the output between Komodo and Komodo MCTS....find it hard to evaluate because of the game. I may try running each (in Tactical analysis...and the Fritz GUI) latter today if I have time. That would likely give a better understanding of which version performs best.

lkaufman
Posts: 4480
Joined: Sun Jan 10, 2010 5:15 am
Location: Maryland USA
Contact:

Re: Auto/Tactical analysis with Komodo MTCS

Post by lkaufman » Sun Nov 03, 2019 4:55 pm

leavenfish wrote:
Sat Nov 02, 2019 7:42 pm
Chessbase has a 'Tactical Analysis' feature. While one would think about any engine would work as good as another as features seem to be preset, I am wondering how Komodo MTCS would fare vs say Komodo regular as concerns their analysis of an existing game.

I ask because when you set Tactical Analysis to go with regular Komodo or Stockfish, the GUI automatically displays 2 lines. I wonder if setting K-MCTS to 2 or 3 lines at about 4 core would actually produce 'better' results than a regular A/B engine?

Using something like the Fritz GUI which offers more analysis might even show better results for MCTS?

I am currently having MCTS analyse a blitz game I just played and so I have no data to look at myself and was wondering if anyone else had done this or had opinions on the merits of MCTS in such analysis - Tactical Analysis set to about 7 or 8 sec a move or Fritz GUI game auto-analysis.
With best two lines displayed, Komodo MCTS and regular Komodo are of about equal strength; I would go with MCTS for reviewing human games because the move choices tend to be more "human". With both displaying 3 lines, MCTS is clearly stronger, and the gap widens with each extra line. When the number of lines exceeds 5, Komodo MCTS is stronger than Stockfish doing the same.
Komodo rules!

Post Reply