HIARCS 2007 Paderborn MP - Put through the paces...

[Erik Roggenburg]

This should be fun. 4+2, Noomen 2007, 128MB hash, 3, 4, 5, some 6 egtbs, 4400+ hardware.

Code: Select all

4 HIARCS Paderborn 2007 MP
Spike 1.2 Turin               :  60 (+ 35,= 19,-  6), 74.2 %


8 HIARCS 12 MP UCI 2T
Spike 1.2 Turin               :  60 (+ 33,= 19,-  8), 70.8 %

[Graham Banks]

My gut feeling is that the Paderborn engine might pleasantly surprise a few people! I'm looking forward to testing it once I've given Hiarcs 12 a good run.

[Ovyron]

It indeed surprised me on my first tests. For one, the playing style seems better (though this is a matter of taste). And it is much better at solving test suite moves faster than H11 or 12 (At least for the few that I tried.)

[Erik Roggenburg]

Code: Select all

8 HIARCS Paderborn 2007 MP  : 
Deep Fritz 10 2T              :  60 (+ 19,= 22,- 19), 50.0 %

7 HIARCS 12 MP UCI 2T       :
Deep Fritz 10 2T              :  60 (+ 21,= 20,- 19), 51.7 %

[Erik Roggenburg]

It indeed surprised me on my first tests. For one, the playing style seems better (though this is a matter of taste). And it is much better at solving test suite moves faster than H11 or 12 (At least for the few that I tried.)

What do you mean by "playing style seems better?" Is it more aggressive? Is it less speculative? I haven't had a chance to compare playing styles, so I'm very interested in your feedback.

[Ovyron]

What do you mean by "playing style seems better?" Is it more aggressive? Is it less speculative?

It's more pleasant to the eye

Really, it's difficult to talk about something that can't be measured, but from the games I've seen, I like how it beats its opponent better than how HIARCS 12 beats its opponents. Also, I could say that it seems to play more speculative than HIARCS 12, and less aggressive than HIARCS 11, so I don't know from where my like for it comes from (I could say it seems more tactical, as it seems to "set up traps" for other engines.)

But I'd rather watch a HIARCSPB2007 game than a game from the other HIARCSs

[Erik Roggenburg]

What do you mean by "playing style seems better?" Is it more aggressive? Is it less speculative?

It's more pleasant to the eye

Really, it's difficult to talk about something that can't be measured, but from the games I've seen, I like how it beats its opponent better than how HIARCS 12 beats its opponents. Also, I could say that it seems to play more speculative than HIARCS 12, and less aggressive than HIARCS 11, so I don't know from where my like for it comes from (I could say it seems more tactical, as it seems to "set up traps" for other engines.)

But I'd rather watch a HIARCSPB2007 game than a game from the other HIARCSs

Yes, sometimes it is hard to put into words. It has a little "je ne sais pas".

[Erik Roggenburg]

Just about identical results vs. Chess Tiger 2007.1 UCI.

Code: Select all

9 HIARCS Paderborn 2007 MP
Chess Tiger 2007.1 UCI        :  60 (+ 28,= 25,-  7), 67.5 %

7 HIARCS 12 MP UCI 2T       
Chess Tiger 2007.1 UCI        :  60 (+ 28,= 24,-  8), 66.7 %

[Erik Roggenburg]

Deep Junior 10.1 vs. HP2007MP:

Code: Select all

9 HIARCS Paderborn 2007 MP
Deep Junior 10.1 2T           :  60 (+ 31,= 18,- 11), 66.7 %

7 HIARCS 12 MP UCI 2T
Deep Junior 10.1 2T           :  60 (+ 31,= 15,- 14), 64.2 %

[Erik Roggenburg]

The dreaded "Match vs. Previous Version" has been completed!

Code: Select all

9 HIARCS Paderborn 2007 MP
HIARCS 11.1 MP UCI 2T         :  60 (+ 14,= 41,-  5), 57.5 %

7 HIARCS 12 MP UCI 2T       
HIARCS 11.1 MP UCI 2T         :  60 (+ 25,= 29,-  6), 65.8 %