In all the lighthearted frivolity about the law, it seems we’ve missed an article on how an ICCF GM evaluates an analysis partner and comes to prefer FF2. Warning: contains actual chess.
https://en.chessbase.com/post/discussin ... al-network
An actual interesting computer chess read about FF2
Moderators: hgm, Rebel, chrisw
-
- Posts: 1631
- Joined: Tue Aug 21, 2018 7:52 pm
- Full name: Dietrich Kappe
An actual interesting computer chess read about FF2
Fat Titz by Stockfish, the engine with the bodaciously big net. Remember: size matters. If you want to learn more about this engine just google for "Fat Titz".
-
- Posts: 136
- Joined: Sat Dec 04, 2010 5:31 pm
- Location: 223
Re: An actual interesting computer chess read about FF2
And I miss amusing postsdkappe wrote: ↑Sat Feb 27, 2021 9:43 pm In all the lighthearted frivolity about the law, it seems we’ve missed an article on how an ICCF GM evaluates an analysis partner and comes to prefer FF2. Warning: contains actual chess.
https://en.chessbase.com/post/discussin ... al-network
Thanks !!
Judge without bias, or don't judge at all...
-
- Posts: 11585
- Joined: Thu Mar 09, 2006 12:57 am
- Location: Birmingham UK
Re: An actual interesting computer chess read about FF2
dkappe wrote: ↑Sat Feb 27, 2021 9:43 pm In all the lighthearted frivolity about the law, it seems we’ve missed an article on how an ICCF GM evaluates an analysis partner and comes to prefer FF2. Warning: contains actual chess.
https://en.chessbase.com/post/discussin ... al-network
Good read - thanks for the link.
One nagging little thought: if it's better at suggesting good moves, then why doesn't it play better chess? Why isn't at the top of the independent rating lists?
Writing is the antidote to confusion.
It's not "how smart you are", it's "how are you smart".
Your brain doesn't work the way you want, so train it!
It's not "how smart you are", it's "how are you smart".
Your brain doesn't work the way you want, so train it!
-
- Posts: 1631
- Joined: Tue Aug 21, 2018 7:52 pm
- Full name: Dietrich Kappe
Re: An actual interesting computer chess read about FF2
Are any of those rankings outside the margin of error? Regardless, they’re fairly close.
I think one clue is that the GM found that SF gave lots of 0.00 evals, while FF2 ventured an actual opinion. But honestly, I can’t do better than that article.
Fat Titz by Stockfish, the engine with the bodaciously big net. Remember: size matters. If you want to learn more about this engine just google for "Fat Titz".
-
- Posts: 512
- Joined: Tue Sep 29, 2020 4:29 pm
- Location: Dublin, Ireland
- Full name: Madeleine Birchfield
Re: An actual interesting computer chess read about FF2
Because of contempt. Stockfish is primarily tested against weaker opponents in the rating lists, for which its default contempt value of 24 centipawns helps defeat weaker opponents, as higher contempt causes Stockfish to complicate the position which weaker engines will invariably blunder in. However, contempt introduces a bias into Stockfish's evaluation, resulting in default Stockfish selecting suboptimal moves at times; this is most evident when Stockfish goes against stronger engines than itself, where having a large contempt like the default 24 is a bad thing and causes Stockfish to blunder.towforce wrote: ↑Sat Feb 27, 2021 11:41 pmdkappe wrote: ↑Sat Feb 27, 2021 9:43 pm In all the lighthearted frivolity about the law, it seems we’ve missed an article on how an ICCF GM evaluates an analysis partner and comes to prefer FF2. Warning: contains actual chess.
https://en.chessbase.com/post/discussin ... al-network
Good read - thanks for the link.
One nagging little thought: if it's better at suggesting good moves, then why doesn't it play better chess? Why isn't at the top of the independent rating lists?
This has always been one of my complaints about the Stockfish project, that its developers are chasing elo gains on the rating lists and on fishtest at the cost of accuracy by setting default contempt to a value different from zero.
The Fat Fritz 2 compile of Stockfish has the default contempt set to zero, resulting in higher quality and less biased evaluations, but on rating lists weaker engines have an easier time drawing Fat Fritz 2 due to contempt being equal to zero. But Fat Fritz 2 isn't the only Stockfish derivative to have contempt zero, syzygy's CFish also has a default contempt of zero, and if syzygy has updated CFish to be par with latest Stockfish dev, then it should show higher quality move choices than latest Stockfish dev and be free, as opposed to the costly Fat Fritz 2.
-
- Posts: 533
- Joined: Sun Sep 06, 2020 4:40 am
- Full name: Connor McMonigle
Re: An actual interesting computer chess read about FF2
Why does the article's author come to the conclusion that Stockfish13 with the FF2 network is superior for analysis compared to Stockfish13 with the default network despite the FF2 network testing weaker than the default network on all independent rating lists?
Well, for one, "suggesting better moves for analysis" is utterly subjective. Suggesting a more trying move (Rab1 instead of Rfb1) in one test position is far from conclusive. Also, it's not like ChessBase is going to publish an article claiming the FF2 network is inferior for analysis. ChessBase, the seller of the product, is the last entity we should expect an honest comparison from.
More importantly, simtests have been performed for the FF2 network showing a >60% similarity between Stockfish13+FF2 and Stockfish13. While simtests are imperfect, such a high similarity score suggests that, for analysis, Stockfish13+FF2 and Stockfish13 would likely be very difficult for any human to even distinguish.
Well, for one, "suggesting better moves for analysis" is utterly subjective. Suggesting a more trying move (Rab1 instead of Rfb1) in one test position is far from conclusive. Also, it's not like ChessBase is going to publish an article claiming the FF2 network is inferior for analysis. ChessBase, the seller of the product, is the last entity we should expect an honest comparison from.
More importantly, simtests have been performed for the FF2 network showing a >60% similarity between Stockfish13+FF2 and Stockfish13. While simtests are imperfect, such a high similarity score suggests that, for analysis, Stockfish13+FF2 and Stockfish13 would likely be very difficult for any human to even distinguish.
-
- Posts: 12541
- Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 8:57 pm
- Location: Redmond, WA USA
Re: An actual interesting computer chess read about FF2
I doubt if anyone in the world is more qualified than Stephen to offer an opinion.
I think part of it lies in offering moves he likes. I happen to know that Stephen likes aggressive, enterprising lines that offer lots of winning chances. Now, this sort of line might score the same as a line that does not offer the same volume of winning chances.
So perhaps it is a style match with his that he likes.
Perhaps FF2 is tuned with longer time control. I don't know the answer to that. I would be interested in specifics as to how exactly he tuned his network. However, the environment here is a bit hostile, so I suspect he won't be offering explanations in this forum
I think part of it lies in offering moves he likes. I happen to know that Stephen likes aggressive, enterprising lines that offer lots of winning chances. Now, this sort of line might score the same as a line that does not offer the same volume of winning chances.
So perhaps it is a style match with his that he likes.
Perhaps FF2 is tuned with longer time control. I don't know the answer to that. I would be interested in specifics as to how exactly he tuned his network. However, the environment here is a bit hostile, so I suspect he won't be offering explanations in this forum
Taking ideas is not a vice, it is a virtue. We have another word for this. It is called learning.
But sharing ideas is an even greater virtue. We have another word for this. It is called teaching.
But sharing ideas is an even greater virtue. We have another word for this. It is called teaching.
-
- Posts: 533
- Joined: Sun Sep 06, 2020 4:40 am
- Full name: Connor McMonigle
Re: An actual interesting computer chess read about FF2
I should clarify that my post was not accusing the author of lying. It's entirely possible, likely even, that he prefers the FF2 network for analysis. My point was that, given that this article was published by ChessBase and that ChessBase wouldn't publish an article by an individual claiming FF2 to be inferior for analysis, there's certainly some selection bias here.Dann Corbit wrote: ↑Sun Feb 28, 2021 12:47 am I doubt if anyone in the world is more qualified than Stephen to offer an opinion.
I think part of it lies in offering moves he likes. I happen to know that Stephen likes aggressive, enterprising lines that offer lots of winning chances. Now, this sort of line might score the same as a line that does not offer the same volume of winning chances.
So perhaps it is a style match with his that he likes.
Perhaps FF2 is tuned with longer time control. I don't know the answer to that. I would be interested in specifics as to how exactly he tuned his network. However, the environment here is a bit hostile, so I suspect he won't be offering explanations in this forum
-
- Posts: 12541
- Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 8:57 pm
- Location: Redmond, WA USA
Re: An actual interesting computer chess read about FF2
Goes without saying.
For years chess companies have put "Word Champion!" on the box when their program won the ICGA tournament.
And they are somewhere below #10 in CCRL and CEGT, bot nobody plays in ICGA anymore except commercial programs with a few Europeans sprinkled in
I don't have any qualms against trying to make money with chess software. But I do wish that chess companies were fully truthful in their ads.
OK, Pollyanna wish.
Now, some might say, "But the ICGA is the world championship!"
Not, in my opinion, since TCEC started.
Now, if you win TCEC, put that on your box and smile from ear to ear.
For years chess companies have put "Word Champion!" on the box when their program won the ICGA tournament.
And they are somewhere below #10 in CCRL and CEGT, bot nobody plays in ICGA anymore except commercial programs with a few Europeans sprinkled in
I don't have any qualms against trying to make money with chess software. But I do wish that chess companies were fully truthful in their ads.
OK, Pollyanna wish.
Now, some might say, "But the ICGA is the world championship!"
Not, in my opinion, since TCEC started.
Now, if you win TCEC, put that on your box and smile from ear to ear.
Taking ideas is not a vice, it is a virtue. We have another word for this. It is called learning.
But sharing ideas is an even greater virtue. We have another word for this. It is called teaching.
But sharing ideas is an even greater virtue. We have another word for this. It is called teaching.
-
- Posts: 208
- Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2018 3:29 pm
- Full name: Adam Treat
Re: An actual interesting computer chess read about FF2
Right, but "actual interesting"Dann Corbit wrote: ↑Sun Feb 28, 2021 3:09 am Goes without saying.
For years chess companies have put "Word Champion!" on the box when their program won the ICGA tournament.
And they are somewhere below #10 in CCRL and CEGT, bot nobody plays in ICGA anymore except commercial programs with a few Europeans sprinkled in
I don't have any qualms against trying to make money with chess software. But I do wish that chess companies were fully truthful in their ads.
OK, Pollyanna wish.
Now, some might say, "But the ICGA is the world championship!"
Not, in my opinion, since TCEC started.
Now, if you win TCEC, put that on your box and smile from ear to ear.