Some recent lower level engines

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

Moderator: Ras

User avatar
Graham Banks
Posts: 46265
Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2006 10:52 am
Location: Auckland, NZ

Some recent lower level engines

Post by Graham Banks »

With my Amateur Series, I'm always looking at new engines to see whether any are strong enough to be included.

My cutoff point is that they must be 2000+ ELO based on CCRL ratings.
As Reger 0.09 is around that level, I use it as a test engine against which to measure the newbies.

I tried out six new engines - Betsabe II 1.0, Bubble 1.5, JaksaH 1.10, Purplehaze 2.0.0, Revati 0.4c and Supra 1.1.

Three of the engines were unsuitable due to operating issues.
I couldn't get JaksaH working, but suspect that it might still be below the 2000 threshold.
Supra 1.1 didn't seem to understand either time controls or correct usage of time, moving almost instantly each move.
Revati didn't seem to understand secondary time controls.

Of the three that seemed functional, both Betsabe II 1.0 and Bubble 1.5 are stronger than the 2000 cutoff and will play in my lowest division.
Purplehaze isn't quite strong enough yet, which was disappointing because I like the name and logo. However, for anybody interested in using it, I can tell you that it's stable.

Hope this information might be of use to somebody.
gbanksnz at gmail.com
User avatar
Matthias Gemuh
Posts: 3245
Joined: Thu Mar 09, 2006 9:10 am

Re: Some recent lower level engines

Post by Matthias Gemuh »

Useful infos. Thanks.


Matthias.
My engine was quite strong till I added knowledge to it.
http://www.chess.hylogic.de
vincent
Posts: 34
Joined: Tue Jan 19, 2010 8:38 am
Location: Brittany, France

Re: Some recent lower level engines

Post by vincent »

Hi Graham,

I'm the author of Purple Haze and yes there is still a lot of work to be above 2000. For example the evaluation function is too simplistic and there is almost certainly hidden bugs in the search. My current goal is to end up with something stronger than TSCP...

But I almost finished polishing the version 2.0.1 which will be my first "official" release. And I think it could be useful for other developers looking for opponents in weak but complete chess engines using Xboard protocol and supporting GNU/Linux.
User avatar
Graham Banks
Posts: 46265
Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2006 10:52 am
Location: Auckland, NZ

Re: Some recent lower level engines

Post by Graham Banks »

vincent wrote:Hi Graham,

I'm the author of Purple Haze and yes there is still a lot of work to be above 2000. For example the evaluation function is too simplistic and there is almost certainly hidden bugs in the search. My current goal is to end up with something stronger than TSCP...

But I almost finished polishing the version 2.0.1 which will be my first "official" release. And I think it could be useful for other developers looking for opponents in weak but complete chess engines using Xboard protocol and supporting GNU/Linux.
Hi Vincent,

as I mentioned, great name and great logo. :)
Really looking forward to the progress of Purplehaze. Thanks for your efforts.

Cheers,
Graham.
gbanksnz at gmail.com
User avatar
Evert
Posts: 2929
Joined: Sat Jan 22, 2011 12:42 am
Location: NL

Re: Some recent lower level engines

Post by Evert »

Graham Banks wrote:With my Amateur Series, I'm always looking at new engines to see whether any are strong enough to be included.
I'm working on releasing both of my engines over the weekend, Jazz and Sjaak (I may need to tweak the latter's name slightly). Jazz is considerably stronger than Sjaak, which is a more general "chess-like" engine. According to my own tests, Jazz is a bit weaker than OliThink, Sjaak is comparable to or a bit stronger than Micro-Max.

Both are single processor, no-ponder engines. Jazz is UCI or XBoard, Sjaak is XBoard only. When I release them, both of them will be GPL. I can make a Win32 compile if I can borrow the Windows netbook for a few minutes, but both engines would really benefit from a 64 bit compile (they use bitboards).
User avatar
Graham Banks
Posts: 46265
Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2006 10:52 am
Location: Auckland, NZ

Re: Some recent lower level engines

Post by Graham Banks »

Evert wrote:
Graham Banks wrote:With my Amateur Series, I'm always looking at new engines to see whether any are strong enough to be included.
I'm working on releasing both of my engines over the weekend, Jazz and Sjaak (I may need to tweak the latter's name slightly). Jazz is considerably stronger than Sjaak, which is a more general "chess-like" engine. According to my own tests, Jazz is a bit weaker than OliThink, Sjaak is comparable to or a bit stronger than Micro-Max.

Both are single processor, no-ponder engines. Jazz is UCI or XBoard, Sjaak is XBoard only. When I release them, both of them will be GPL. I can make a Win32 compile if I can borrow the Windows netbook for a few minutes, but both engines would really benefit from a 64 bit compile (they use bitboards).
Hi Evert,

I'll include the stronger of the two engines because I limit participation to one engine per author.
As an example, I include Spark, but not Bright (even though both play differently).

Looking forward to testing Jazz for you. :D

Cheers,
Graham.
gbanksnz at gmail.com
User avatar
Dr.Wael Deeb
Posts: 9773
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 8:44 pm
Location: Amman,Jordan

Re: Some recent lower level engines

Post by Dr.Wael Deeb »

Graham Banks wrote:
Evert wrote:
Graham Banks wrote:With my Amateur Series, I'm always looking at new engines to see whether any are strong enough to be included.
I'm working on releasing both of my engines over the weekend, Jazz and Sjaak (I may need to tweak the latter's name slightly). Jazz is considerably stronger than Sjaak, which is a more general "chess-like" engine. According to my own tests, Jazz is a bit weaker than OliThink, Sjaak is comparable to or a bit stronger than Micro-Max.

Both are single processor, no-ponder engines. Jazz is UCI or XBoard, Sjaak is XBoard only. When I release them, both of them will be GPL. I can make a Win32 compile if I can borrow the Windows netbook for a few minutes, but both engines would really benefit from a 64 bit compile (they use bitboards).
Hi Evert,

I'll include the stronger of the two engines because I limit participation to one engine per author.
As an example, I include Spark, but not Bright (even though both play differently).

Looking forward to testing Jazz for you. :D

Cheers,
Graham.
Bright plays stronger than Spark and it's rated higher in my rating list....
Dr.D
_No one can hit as hard as life.But it ain’t about how hard you can hit.It’s about how hard you can get hit and keep moving forward.How much you can take and keep moving forward….
User avatar
Graham Banks
Posts: 46265
Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2006 10:52 am
Location: Auckland, NZ

Re: Some recent lower level engines

Post by Graham Banks »

Dr.Wael Deeb wrote:Bright plays stronger than Spark and it's rated higher in my rating list....
Dr.D
Spark 1.0 (after 940 games) is roughly 90 ELO stronger than Bright 0.5c (after 1539 games) in the list that I use, which is why I choose it over Bright in my Amateur Series.
I guess we can agree that both are great engines though. 8-)

Cheers,
Graham.
gbanksnz at gmail.com
User avatar
hgm
Posts: 28519
Joined: Fri Mar 10, 2006 10:06 am
Location: Amsterdam
Full name: H G Muller

Re: Some recent lower level engines

Post by hgm »

Have you already tried Daniel Shawul's Nebiyu 1.1? I have not tried that at normal Chess (but it says it supports it, if you don't click the Checkers version by mistake :wink: ), but it crushes Fairy-Max at Spartan, (even with 6-fold time odds), so it must be well over 2000 CCRL for normal Chess as well.

[edit] Oh, I guess you don't want that either because of Scorpio...
Last edited by hgm on Sat Feb 19, 2011 10:54 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Graham Banks
Posts: 46265
Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2006 10:52 am
Location: Auckland, NZ

Re: Some recent lower level engines

Post by Graham Banks »

hgm wrote:Have you already tried Daniel Shawul's Nebiyu 1.1? I have not tried that at normal Chess (but it says it supports it, if you don't click the Checkers version by mistake :wink: ), but it crushes Fairy-Max at Spartan, (even with 6-fold time odds), so it must be well over 2000 CCRL for normal Chess as well.
No I haven't, mainly because I use his strongest engine, Scorpio.

Cheers,
Graham.
gbanksnz at gmail.com