Testing LazySMP

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

Moderator: Ras

LazySMP

Re: New engine: LazySMP

Post by LazySMP »

chessica wrote: Tue Oct 15, 2024 3:47 pm

Code: Select all

   Motor          Punkte          Al         La    S-B
1: Alexander1.1   10,0/10 ·········· 1111111111    0,00
2: LazySMP_popcnt 0,0/10  0000000000 ··········    0,00
Game level: Tournament game in 5 minutes
Hardware: AMD Athlon(tm) II X4 630 Processor with 11.8 GB memory
Operating system: Windows 10 Enterprise Professional (Build 9200) 64 bit
Did you notice any bugs or unexpected crashes in my engine during the tournament? Can you estimate an ELO for my chess engine?!
User avatar
Rebel
Posts: 7298
Joined: Thu Aug 18, 2011 12:04 pm
Full name: Ed Schröder

Re: New engine: LazySMP

Post by Rebel »

Code: Select all

Finished game 5 (blunder-5.0 vs lazysmp-3.0): 1-0 {White wins by adjudication}
Score of blunder-5.0 vs lazysmp-3.0: 1 - 0 - 0  [1.000] 1
Started game 13 of 1000 (blunder-5.0 vs lazysmp-3.0)
Finished game 2 (lazysmp-3.0 vs blunder-5.0): 0-1 {Black wins by adjudication}
Score of blunder-5.0 vs lazysmp-3.0: 2 - 0 - 0  [1.000] 2
Started game 14 of 1000 (lazysmp-3.0 vs blunder-5.0)
Finished game 12 (lazysmp-3.0 vs blunder-5.0): 1-0 {White wins by adjudication}
Score of blunder-5.0 vs lazysmp-3.0: 2 - 1 - 0  [0.667] 3
Started game 15 of 1000 (blunder-5.0 vs lazysmp-3.0)
Finished game 7 (blunder-5.0 vs lazysmp-3.0): 1-0 {White wins by adjudication}
Score of blunder-5.0 vs lazysmp-3.0: 3 - 1 - 0  [0.750] 4
Started game 16 of 1000 (lazysmp-3.0 vs blunder-5.0)
Finished game 8 (lazysmp-3.0 vs blunder-5.0): 1-0 {White wins by adjudication}
Score of blunder-5.0 vs lazysmp-3.0: 3 - 2 - 0  [0.600] 5
Started game 17 of 1000 (blunder-5.0 vs lazysmp-3.0)
Finished game 6 (lazysmp-3.0 vs blunder-5.0): 0-1 {Black wins by adjudication}
Score of blunder-5.0 vs lazysmp-3.0: 4 - 2 - 0  [0.667] 6
Started game 18 of 1000 (lazysmp-3.0 vs blunder-5.0)
Finished game 3 (blunder-5.0 vs lazysmp-3.0): 0-1 {Black wins by adjudication}
Score of blunder-5.0 vs lazysmp-3.0: 4 - 3 - 0  [0.571] 7
Started game 19 of 1000 (blunder-5.0 vs lazysmp-3.0)
Finished game 13 (blunder-5.0 vs lazysmp-3.0): 1-0 {White wins by adjudication}
Score of blunder-5.0 vs lazysmp-3.0: 5 - 3 - 0  [0.625] 8
Started game 20 of 1000 (lazysmp-3.0 vs blunder-5.0)
Finished game 15 (blunder-5.0 vs lazysmp-3.0): 0-1 {Black wins by adjudication}
Score of blunder-5.0 vs lazysmp-3.0: 5 - 4 - 0  [0.556] 9
Started game 21 of 1000 (blunder-5.0 vs lazysmp-3.0)
Finished game 17 (blunder-5.0 vs lazysmp-3.0): 0-1 {Black wins by adjudication}
Score of blunder-5.0 vs lazysmp-3.0: 5 - 5 - 0  [0.500] 10
Started game 22 of 1000 (lazysmp-3.0 vs blunder-5.0)
Finished game 11 (blunder-5.0 vs lazysmp-3.0): 1-0 {White wins by adjudication}
Score of blunder-5.0 vs lazysmp-3.0: 6 - 5 - 0  [0.545] 11
Started game 23 of 1000 (blunder-5.0 vs lazysmp-3.0)
Finished game 18 (lazysmp-3.0 vs blunder-5.0): 0-1 {Black wins by adjudication}
Score of blunder-5.0 vs lazysmp-3.0: 7 - 5 - 0  [0.583] 12
Started game 24 of 1000 (lazysmp-3.0 vs blunder-5.0)
Finished game 14 (lazysmp-3.0 vs blunder-5.0): 0-1 {Black wins by adjudication}
Score of blunder-5.0 vs lazysmp-3.0: 8 - 5 - 0  [0.615] 13
Started game 25 of 1000 (blunder-5.0 vs lazysmp-3.0)
Finished game 4 (lazysmp-3.0 vs blunder-5.0): 1-0 {White wins by adjudication}
Score of blunder-5.0 vs lazysmp-3.0: 8 - 6 - 0  [0.571] 14
Started game 26 of 1000 (lazysmp-3.0 vs blunder-5.0)
Finished game 9 (blunder-5.0 vs lazysmp-3.0): 1/2-1/2 {Draw by fifty moves rule}
Score of blunder-5.0 vs lazysmp-3.0: 8 - 6 - 1  [0.567] 15
Started game 27 of 1000 (blunder-5.0 vs lazysmp-3.0)
Finished game 21 (blunder-5.0 vs lazysmp-3.0): 1-0 {White wins by adjudication}
Score of blunder-5.0 vs lazysmp-3.0: 9 - 6 - 1  [0.594] 16
Started game 28 of 1000 (lazysmp-3.0 vs blunder-5.0)
Terminating process of engine lazysmp-3.0(1)
Finished game 1 (blunder-5.0 vs lazysmp-3.0): 1-0 {Black disconnects}
Blunder 5.0 is CCRL 2020
90% of coding is debugging, the other 10% is writing bugs.
LazySMP

Re: New engine: LazySMP

Post by LazySMP »

Rebel wrote: Tue Oct 15, 2024 5:37 pm

Code: Select all

Terminating process of engine lazysmp-3.0(1)
Finished game 1 (blunder-5.0 vs lazysmp-3.0): 1-0 {Black disconnects}
But it can't help. Could you, please, send me the PGN file, to see why the engine disconnects?
F. Bluemers
Posts: 880
Joined: Thu Mar 09, 2006 11:21 pm
Location: Nederland

Re: New engine: LazySMP

Post by F. Bluemers »

Why can't you even run the simplests of tests?
You won't make great progress with your 'engine' this way.
Insisting other people to download your engine for whatever reason...
User avatar
Rebel
Posts: 7298
Joined: Thu Aug 18, 2011 12:04 pm
Full name: Ed Schröder

Re: New engine: LazySMP

Post by Rebel »

LazySMP wrote: Tue Oct 15, 2024 7:58 pm
Rebel wrote: Tue Oct 15, 2024 5:37 pm

Code: Select all

Terminating process of engine lazysmp-3.0(1)
Finished game 1 (blunder-5.0 vs lazysmp-3.0): 1-0 {Black disconnects}
But it can't help. Could you, please, send me the PGN file, to see why the engine disconnects?
I am not your slave Daniel.
90% of coding is debugging, the other 10% is writing bugs.
User avatar
hgm
Posts: 28344
Joined: Fri Mar 10, 2006 10:06 am
Location: Amsterdam
Full name: H G Muller

Re: New engine: LazySMP

Post by hgm »

LazySMP wrote: Tue Oct 15, 2024 7:58 pm
Rebel wrote: Tue Oct 15, 2024 5:37 pm

Code: Select all

Terminating process of engine lazysmp-3.0(1)
Finished game 1 (blunder-5.0 vs lazysmp-3.0): 1-0 {Black disconnects}
But it can't help. Could you, please, send me the PGN file, to see why the engine disconnects?
Since your engine appears to crash so frequently, you should already see it yourself if you let it play a few games. Apparently you don't even do that.

Most engine testers are serious people, and won't waste their time on obviously defective engines. They see it as their job to measure the strength of engines that do work correctly. Not to do test it for bugs, or do other development work a serious developer would do.

I advise you to let your engine play a couple of hundred games against Fairy-Max; not being able to beat Fairy-Max is a strong indication that the engine is buggy.
chessica
Posts: 909
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2022 11:30 pm
Full name: Esmeralda Pinto

Re: New engine: LazySMP

Post by chessica »

-----------------Fairy-Max-4.80-----------------
Fairy-Max-4.80 - LazySMP_popcnt : 2,5/10 1-6-3 (01==00000=) 25% -191
-----------------LazySMP_popcnt-----------------
LazySMP_popcnt - Fairy-Max-4.80 : 7,5/10 6-1-3 (10==11111=) 75% +191
LazySMP

Re: New engine: LazySMP

Post by LazySMP »

hgm wrote: Tue Oct 15, 2024 10:27 pm Since your engine appears to crash so frequently, you should already see it yourself if you let it play a few games. Apparently you don't even do that.

Most engine testers are serious people, and won't waste their time on obviously defective engines. They see it as their job to measure the strength of engines that do work correctly. Not to do test it for bugs, or do other development work a serious developer would do.

I advise you to let your engine play a couple of hundred games against Fairy-Max; not being able to beat Fairy-Max is a strong indication that the engine is buggy.
Thank you for your advice on how best to test my chess engine. I've run a number of matches between Fruit 2.1 and LazySMP 3.0:

https://filebin.net/blkcw211fmlb0rtr/game.pgn

There were no unexpected disconnections in any game. The important point is that in all games LazySMP lost to Fruit by a huge margin.
Rebel wrote: Sat Oct 12, 2024 10:57 pm

Code: Select all

No. Name         Win Draw Loss Unf.  Score Games       %
--------------------------------------------------------
  1 fruit-2.1    +62   =2   -1  *11   63.0    65   96.9%
  2 lazysmp-3.0   +1   =2  -62  *11    2.0    65    3.1%
  
This claim that lazysmp can beat fruit is way off the mark anyway.
User avatar
Rebel
Posts: 7298
Joined: Thu Aug 18, 2011 12:04 pm
Full name: Ed Schröder

Re: New engine: LazySMP

Post by Rebel »

LazySMP wrote: Tue Oct 15, 2024 10:54 pm
Rebel wrote: Sat Oct 12, 2024 10:57 pm

Code: Select all

No. Name         Win Draw Loss Unf.  Score Games       %
--------------------------------------------------------
  1 fruit-2.1    +62   =2   -1  *11   63.0    65   96.9%
  2 lazysmp-3.0   +1   =2  -62  *11    2.0    65    3.1%
  
This claim that lazysmp can beat fruit is way off the mark anyway.
Clown.
90% of coding is debugging, the other 10% is writing bugs.
Guenther
Posts: 4718
Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 6:33 am
Location: Regensburg, Germany
Full name: Guenther Simon

Re: New engine: LazySMP

Post by Guenther »

LazySMP wrote: Tue Oct 15, 2024 10:54 pm ...

Thank you for your advice on how best to test my chess engine. I've run a number of matches between Fruit 2.1 and LazySMP 3.0:

https://filebin.net/blkcw211fmlb0rtr/game.pgn

There were no unexpected disconnections in any game. The important point is that in all games LazySMP lost to Fruit by a huge margin.

Uahhh, 40 games, result 40:0 for Fruit, sudden death tc, exactly one startposition (the startpos) - 20 (near) 'doubles' as expected, never seen an engine developer test in a CB GUI too ;) A wonderful test.

Code: Select all

C:\Users\Admin\Desktop\troll.pgn/13: B=10.3 plies; 2,059kN/s} 1. Nc3 {[%eval 7,16] [%emt 0:00:02] Both last book
C:\Users\Admin\Desktop\troll.pgn/84: B=23.0 plies; 4,342kN/s} 1. Nf3 {[%eval 10,12] [%emt 0:00:02] Both last book
C:\Users\Admin\Desktop\troll.pgn/131: B=10.2 plies; 1,979kN/s} 1. Nc3 {[%eval 7,16] [%emt 0:00:02] Both last book
C:\Users\Admin\Desktop\troll.pgn/180: B=16.3 plies; 4,321kN/s} 1. Nf3 {[%eval 10,12] [%emt 0:00:02] Both last book
C:\Users\Admin\Desktop\troll.pgn/221: 9 plies; 2,078kN/s} 1. Nc3 {[%eval 7,16] [%emt 0:00:02] Both last book move} d5
C:\Users\Admin\Desktop\troll.pgn/277: B=16.3 plies; 4,323kN/s} 1. Nf3 {[%eval 10,12] [%emt 0:00:02] Both last book
C:\Users\Admin\Desktop\troll.pgn/318: B=12.2 plies; 2,262kN/s} 1. Nc3 {[%eval 7,16] [%emt 0:00:02] Both last book
C:\Users\Admin\Desktop\troll.pgn/377: B=16.3 plies; 4,321kN/s} 1. Nf3 {[%eval 10,12] [%emt 0:00:02] Both last book
C:\Users\Admin\Desktop\troll.pgn/418: B=11.3 plies; 2,068kN/s} 1. Nc3 {[%eval 7,16] [%emt 0:00:02] Both last book
C:\Users\Admin\Desktop\troll.pgn/489: B=15.9 plies; 4,390kN/s} 1. Nf3 {[%eval 10,12] [%emt 0:00:02] Both last book
C:\Users\Admin\Desktop\troll.pgn/534: B=10.7 plies; 2,243kN/s} 1. Nc3 {[%eval 7,16] [%emt 0:00:02] Both last book
C:\Users\Admin\Desktop\troll.pgn/586: B=16.3 plies; 4,320kN/s} 1. Nf3 {[%eval 10,12] [%emt 0:00:02] Both last book
C:\Users\Admin\Desktop\troll.pgn/627: B=13.3 plies; 2,630kN/s} 1. Nc3 {[%eval 7,16] [%emt 0:00:02] Both last book
C:\Users\Admin\Desktop\troll.pgn/679: B=16.3 plies; 4,313kN/s} 1. Nf3 {[%eval 10,12] [%emt 0:00:02] Both last book
C:\Users\Admin\Desktop\troll.pgn/720: B=13.4 plies; 2,740kN/s} 1. Nc3 {[%eval 7,16] [%emt 0:00:02] Both last book
C:\Users\Admin\Desktop\troll.pgn/772: B=16.3 plies; 4,323kN/s} 1. Nf3 {[%eval 10,12] [%emt 0:00:02] Both last book
C:\Users\Admin\Desktop\troll.pgn/812: B=10.9 plies; 2,000kN/s} 1. Nc3 {[%eval 7,16] [%emt 0:00:02] Both last book
C:\Users\Admin\Desktop\troll.pgn/876: B=16.3 plies; 4,326kN/s} 1. Nf3 {[%eval 10,12] [%emt 0:00:02] Both last book
C:\Users\Admin\Desktop\troll.pgn/917: B=13.3 plies; 2,588kN/s} 1. Nc3 {[%eval 7,16] [%emt 0:00:02] Both last book
C:\Users\Admin\Desktop\troll.pgn/969: B=16.3 plies; 4,324kN/s} 1. Nf3 {[%eval 10,12] [%emt 0:00:02] Both last book
C:\Users\Admin\Desktop\troll.pgn/1010: B=12.2 plies; 2,234kN/s} 1. Nc3 {[%eval 7,16] [%emt 0:00:02] Both last book
C:\Users\Admin\Desktop\troll.pgn/1068: B=16.4 plies; 4,331kN/s} 1. Nf3 {[%eval 10,12] [%emt 0:00:02] Both last book
C:\Users\Admin\Desktop\troll.pgn/1109: B=10.4 plies; 2,021kN/s} 1. Nc3 {[%eval 7,16] [%emt 0:00:02] Both last book
C:\Users\Admin\Desktop\troll.pgn/1159: B=16.3 plies; 4,324kN/s} 1. Nf3 {[%eval 10,12] [%emt 0:00:02] Both last book
C:\Users\Admin\Desktop\troll.pgn/1200: B=13.4 plies; 2,681kN/s} 1. Nc3 {[%eval 7,16] [%emt 0:00:02] Both last book
C:\Users\Admin\Desktop\troll.pgn/1252: B=16.3 plies; 4,321kN/s} 1. Nf3 {[%eval 10,12] [%emt 0:00:02] Both last book
C:\Users\Admin\Desktop\troll.pgn/1293: B=10.9 plies; 2,152kN/s} 1. Nc3 {[%eval 7,16] [%emt 0:00:02] Both last book
C:\Users\Admin\Desktop\troll.pgn/1347: B=15.9 plies; 4,406kN/s} 1. Nf3 {[%eval 10,12] [%emt 0:00:02] Both last book
C:\Users\Admin\Desktop\troll.pgn/1394: B=10.0 plies; 2,102kN/s} 1. Nc3 {[%eval 7,16] [%emt 0:00:02] Both last book
C:\Users\Admin\Desktop\troll.pgn/1446: B=16.3 plies; 4,318kN/s} 1. Nf3 {[%eval 10,12] [%emt 0:00:02] Both last book
C:\Users\Admin\Desktop\troll.pgn/1486: B=13.3 plies; 2,630kN/s} 1. Nc3 {[%eval 7,16] [%emt 0:00:02] Both last book
C:\Users\Admin\Desktop\troll.pgn/1538: B=16.4 plies; 4,324kN/s} 1. Nf3 {[%eval 10,12] [%emt 0:00:02] Both last book
C:\Users\Admin\Desktop\troll.pgn/1579: B=10.2 plies; 1,928kN/s} 1. Nc3 {[%eval 7,16] [%emt 0:00:02] Both last book
C:\Users\Admin\Desktop\troll.pgn/1642: B=15.5 plies; 4,304kN/s} 1. Nf3 {[%eval 10,12] [%emt 0:00:02] Both last book
C:\Users\Admin\Desktop\troll.pgn/1698: B=10.4 plies; 2,150kN/s} 1. Nc3 {[%eval 7,16] [%emt 0:00:02] Both last book
C:\Users\Admin\Desktop\troll.pgn/1755: B=16.5 plies; 4,238kN/s} 1. Nf3 {[%eval 10,12] [%emt 0:00:02] Both last book
C:\Users\Admin\Desktop\troll.pgn/1802: B=13.3 plies; 2,624kN/s} 1. Nc3 {[%eval 7,16] [%emt 0:00:02] Both last book
C:\Users\Admin\Desktop\troll.pgn/1854: B=16.5 plies; 4,236kN/s} 1. Nf3 {[%eval 10,12] [%emt 0:00:02] Both last book
C:\Users\Admin\Desktop\troll.pgn/1901: B=10.8 plies; 2,233kN/s} 1. Nc3 {[%eval 7,16] [%emt 0:00:02] Both last book
C:\Users\Admin\Desktop\troll.pgn/1954: B=16.8 plies; 4,339kN/s} 1. Nf3 {[%eval 10,12] [%emt 0:00:02] Both last book
https://rwbc-chess.de

[Trolls n'existent pas...]