Not logged inRybka Chess Community Forum
Up Topic Rybka Support & Discussion / Rybka Discussion / Positional Test for Komodo 3 and Others
- - By Razor (****) Date 2011-08-17 20:39
(16) Capablanca,J (2725) - Yates,F (2470) [C90]
Hastings (1), 1919
[Holm, Ziegler, Lehtivaara]
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 Nf6 5.0-0 Be7 6.Re1 b5 7.Bb3 d6 8.c3 Na5 9.Bc2 c5 10.d4 Qc7 11.Nbd2 Bg4 12.d5 g5 13.Nf1 h6 14.Ng3 Rd8 15.a4 b4 16.cxb4 cxb4 17.Bd3 Bc8 18.Be3 Ng4 19.Rc1 Qb8 20.Bd2 Qb6 21.Qe2 Nb3 22.Rc6 Qa5 23.Bxa6 Bd7 24.Bb5 Bxc6 25.Bxc6+ Kf8 26.Qc4 Nxd2 27.Nxd2 Qa7 28.Qe2 h5 29.Nf5 Bf6 30.Nc4 Qc5 31.b3 Nh6 32.Nxh6 Rxh6 33.Qe3 Rc8

See how close your chess engine gets to following the great man!  :o)

Sorry, I have no idea how to post diagrams.
Parent - - By Lukas Cimiotti (Bronze) Date 2011-08-17 20:42

>Sorry, I have no idea how to post diagrams.


Just post the FEN
Parent - - By Razor (****) Date 2011-08-18 07:03 Edited 2011-08-18 11:22
Is this any better?

2r2k2/5p2/2Bp1b1r/2qPp1pp/PpN1P3/1P2Q3/5PPP/4R1K1 w - -
Parent - By Uly (Gold) Date 2011-08-18 07:08
That FEN is missing side to move, once you add "w - -" at the end, it works and the forum automatically produces a diagram.

2r2k2/5p2/2Bp1b1r/2qPp1pp/PpN1P3/1P2Q3/5PPP/4R1K1 w - -
Parent - - By Lukas Cimiotti (Bronze) Date 2011-08-18 11:23
If you copy and paste your FEN from your GUI it works.
I hope you don't mind I edited your post. (I wanted to find out what was wrong with your FEN)
Parent - By Razor (****) Date 2011-08-18 14:56
no probs - thanks
Parent - - By h1a8 (***) Date 2011-08-18 17:07
What's the solution?
Parent - - By Razor (****) Date 2011-08-18 17:18 Edited 2011-08-18 17:20
Capablanca continued Rc1 - most engines I suspect will want to exchange queens I would guess - it would be good to know how the latest version of Rybka and Komodo do with this.

I tabled this problem as it is a very good example I think of what Larry refers to as, 'positional chess'.
Parent - - By h1a8 (***) Date 2011-08-18 18:01
I found the game. It said, Rc1 is the safer way (for a human) not necessarily the most efficient for a computer. I'm not so sure why Rc1 is better than Qxc5, after all it is a win for white anyway.
Parent - - By Razor (****) Date 2011-08-18 20:35
Yes, there are many ways to win this game but Capablanca played Rc1 {I suspect most GMs would play Rc1 too} - this was the main reason for posting this position and why it is a good one to use - most engines {perhaps all} will prefer to exchange - I guess the coding that programmers place in their software tends to force this type of play - this is why I am fascinated with Larry's comments about K3 and would like to think {hope really} that Larry/Don are on to something that breaks away from mainstream coding where a forced exchange is what engines are continually looking for.
Parent - By Jesse Gersenson (***) Date 2011-08-19 00:53
Rc1 was komodo 3's 3rd choice at depth 29.
Parent - - By h1a8 (***) Date 2011-08-19 01:50
Playing like a human GM doesn't mean you are playing positionally better.
Rc1 could be less stronger than the exchange.
I would rather a program play strong moves regardless if they are human positional or not.
Note: human positional means something a human would play.
But
If two moves are equally strong then I want the program to play the human like move mostly.
Parent - - By Moz (****) Date 2011-08-19 02:39

> I would rather a program play strong moves regardless if they are human positional or not.


I would rather have a program that plays strong moves that are different than moves by other strong programs. That's what makes Komodo such a great engine in my eyes. It's not that I necessarily think that a "positional" style is better - it's that Komodo plays so well while still managing to play so much differently than other engines.

Engine diversity is very good for computer chess.
Parent - By Uly (Gold) Date 2011-08-19 04:18
+1
Parent - By Bouddha (****) Date 2011-08-19 07:55
+1
Parent - - By BankShots (***) Date 2011-08-19 19:56

> I would rather have a program that plays strong moves that are different than moves by other strong programs. That's what makes Komodo such a great engine in my eyes. It's not that I necessarily think that a "positional" style is better - it's that Komodo plays so well while still managing to play so much differently than other engines.
>
> Engine diversity is very good for computer chess.


I would like to see an option to be able to play an engine's second best moves if that move were within eg. 0.10 eval for negative evals to or within 0.75 eval for positive evals.  I think that would be :cool:!  (Though this would might need to be changed to a percent-basis for some engine's evals. :roll:).
:eek:
Parent - - By Uly (Gold) Date 2011-08-20 02:05
I think Aquarium has such a "Handicap" feature, that can be used with any UCI engine.

So it seems like a GUI feature, not an engine one (the engine can't do it by itself because in single pv it's only getting the score of one move and doesn't know the score of the second one, MultiPV solves this but it's trivial to do on the GUI side, so why would an engine bother?)
Parent - - By BankShots (***) Date 2011-08-20 11:44

> I think Aquarium has such a "Handicap" feature, that can be used with any UCI engine.
>
> So it seems like a GUI feature, not an engine one (the engine can't do it by itself because in single pv it's only getting the score of one move and doesn't know the score of the second one, MultiPV solves this but it's trivial to do on the GUI side, so why would an engine bother?)


I am one of those people who enjoy engine/piecedriver matches!

Yes Aquarium will allow you to cut MultiPV by value or percent...but as far as I am aware this is only for humans in correspondence mode.  Perhaps that has changed.  I would not necessarily know as I am using Arena now as my main GUI because it is so powerful and free and in development.  However, you certainly cannot do it (yet?) in Arena and I don't think that Aquarium will let you run engine games with the engine's second choice this way.

I got the impression the poster I was responding to initially was talking about piecedriver matches--as they were talking about the style of the games from the piecedriver's perspective, not the human copiloting them! :lol:
ex1.:  "...program that plays strong moves..."
ex2.:  "...play so much differently than other engines."
Parent - By Uly (Gold) Date 2011-08-20 12:52
My point is that it's a feature that you'd want to bug the GUI authors about, and that after it's implemented ALL engines will be able to benefit.

It's not a feature you'd bug the engine authors about. In other words, it's not a feature you'd ask to be implemented in Komodo, but a feature you'd like to see implemented in Arena or Aquarium, then Komodo under them would use the feature, along with all other engines.
Parent - - By BankShots (***) Date 2011-08-20 12:08
My initial point was that by chosing from the engine's second, third, fourth choice, you might get different style & play as well.  Many people accuse the engines of already playing too "Tactical", so perhaps using not their top PV would yeild a more "Positional" Style-of-Play!!! :eek::cool::wink:
Parent - By BankShots (***) Date 2011-08-20 12:28

> My initial point was that by chosing from the engine's second, third, fourth choice, you might get different style & play as well.  Many people accuse the engines of already playing too "Tactical", so perhaps using not their top PV would yeild a more "Positional" Style-of-Play!!! <img title="eek" class="fsm fsm_eek" alt=":eek:" src="/mwf/v5/epx.png" /><img title="cool" class="fsm fsm_cool" alt=":cool:" src="/mwf/v5/epx.png" /><img title="wink" class="fsm fsm_wink" alt=":wink:" src="/mwf/v5/epx.png" />


If this is the "Solution" to making engines play "Positional" Chess, then I would like to be paid btw!!!!!  Quid pro quo!!!  Be a sport!  Remember Good Ethics for Life. :grin:
Parent - By BankShots (***) Date 2011-08-20 12:58

> My initial point was that by chosing from the engine's second, third, fourth choice, you might get different style & play as well.  Many people accuse the engines of already playing too "Tactical", so perhaps using not their top PV would yeild a more "Positional" Style-of-Play!!! <img title="eek" class="fsm fsm_eek" alt=":eek:" src="/mwf/v5/epx.png" /><img title="cool" class="fsm fsm_cool" alt=":cool:" src="/mwf/v5/epx.png" /><img title="wink" class="fsm fsm_wink" alt=":wink:" src="/mwf/v5/epx.png" />


Oh well......Solved. :lol::grin::cool:
Up Topic Rybka Support & Discussion / Rybka Discussion / Positional Test for Komodo 3 and Others

Powered by mwForum 2.27.4 © 1999-2012 Markus Wichitill