fkarger wrote: ↑Tue Apr 22, 2025 10:52 am
---
1) What are the top engines for solving such a test suite?
My general impression is that Sting and Crystal are best
when it comes to positions which are (too) hard for Stockfish.
In extreme cases Chest is also interesting.
Otherwise Stockfish is a very good choice.
2) What would be your set of choice of the 3 engines to solve as many positions as possible?
---
To set this question and to get a serious answer, you need experience: chess player (ELO 2000+) + study composer (enthusiast). And welcome: programmer (heuristics or/and NN) + HAI (human autonomous intelligence).
It is very important to know the real value of the tested positions (valid or statistical).
Sting (based on the very old Stockfish) is intended only to demonstrate the capabilities of heuristic algorithms for AI (autonomous intelligence), not to prove tactical abilities in statistical positions.
fkarger wrote: ↑Tue Apr 22, 2025 10:52 am
---
1) What are the top engines for solving such a test suite?
My general impression is that Sting and Crystal are best
when it comes to positions which are (too) hard for Stockfish.
In extreme cases Chest is also interesting.
Otherwise Stockfish is a very good choice.
2) What would be your set of choice of the 3 engines to solve as many positions as possible?
---
To set this question and to get a serious answer, you need experience: chess player (ELO 2000+) + study composer (enthusiast). And welcome: programmer (heuristics or/and NN) + HAI (human autonomous intelligence).
It is very important to know the real value of the tested positions (valid or statistical).
Sting (based on the very old Stockfish) is intended only to demonstrate the capabilities of heuristic algorithms for AI (autonomous intelligence), not to prove tactical abilities in statistical positions.
Interestingly Sting showed excellent tactical abilities in many positions I tested.
fkarger wrote: ↑Tue Apr 22, 2025 10:52 am
---
1) What are the top engines for solving such a test suite?
My general impression is that Sting and Crystal are best
when it comes to positions which are (too) hard for Stockfish.
In extreme cases Chest is also interesting.
Otherwise Stockfish is a very good choice.
2) What would be your set of choice of the 3 engines to solve as many positions as possible?
---
To set this question and to get a serious answer, you need experience: chess player (ELO 2000+) + study composer (enthusiast). And welcome: programmer (heuristics or/and NN) + HAI (human autonomous intelligence).
It is very important to know the real value of the tested positions (valid or statistical).
Sting (based on the very old Stockfish) is intended only to demonstrate the capabilities of heuristic algorithms for AI (autonomous intelligence), not to prove tactical abilities in statistical positions.
Interestingly Sting showed excellent tactical abilities in many positions I tested.
You don't understand me. The same (as you) individuals are already here. They prepare and perform questionable (maybe necessary) tests. And they are specifically organized.
fkarger wrote: ↑Tue Apr 22, 2025 10:52 am
---
1) What are the top engines for solving such a test suite?
My general impression is that Sting and Crystal are best
when it comes to positions which are (too) hard for Stockfish.
In extreme cases Chest is also interesting.
Otherwise Stockfish is a very good choice.
2) What would be your set of choice of the 3 engines to solve as many positions as possible?
---
To set this question and to get a serious answer, you need experience: chess player (ELO 2000+) + study composer (enthusiast). And welcome: programmer (heuristics or/and NN) + HAI (human autonomous intelligence).
It is very important to know the real value of the tested positions (valid or statistical).
Sting (based on the very old Stockfish) is intended only to demonstrate the capabilities of heuristic algorithms for AI (autonomous intelligence), not to prove tactical abilities in statistical positions.
Interestingly Sting showed excellent tactical abilities in many positions I tested.
You don't understand me. The same (as you) individuals are already here. They prepare and perform questionable (maybe necessary) tests. And they are specifically organized.
Or you don't understand what I understand
Never mind. I love this kind of activity.
And that is important.
