I just checked and there are currently 529 users online.
Some people say you get an unreliable mix of evaluations in 1 project. Normally I make 2 projects and manually change best lines between them. Or can that be done more efficient?
On my dinky card it doesn't play up to SF's level, but my card is really puny compared to what they run it on in tournys.
I believe our intuition is an accumulated memory of which moves worked well in certain types of positions and which did not.
These moves can come from our own games or from study, but in either case a person's intuition "hardens" after awhile in a way that makes them tend to find certain types of moves and miss others.
I won a game awhile back where my opponent could have crushed me by putting his queen where my pawn could take it. Neither one of us saw it at the time, but the computer found it instantly because it does not have an intuition.
The way LC0 is training itself seems strongly analogous to my hypothesis about how humans acquire intuition, so I predict it will hit a rating plateau caused by missing certain types of moves that are either usually bad, but good in a particular position, or usually good but bad in a particular position.
> The way LC0 is training itself seems strongly analogous to my hypothesis about how humans acquire intuition, so I predict it will hit a rating plateau caused by missing certain types of moves that are either usually bad, but good in a particular position, or usually good but bad in a particular position.
The big difference being that Lc0 isn't JUST an evaluation function, it also does roll outs of games before deciding on a move. Humans don't do this. When you are playing human-human chess, everything happens in your head and then you play the move on the board. You don't get to try 20,000 games with that move to see if it's any good.
So, in many ways, humans may have an EVALUATION FUNCTION similar to LC0, but their search is closer to ALPHA BETA engines, like Stockfish.
We just don't know how good Lc0 will get.
If Lc0 is quite a bit weaker than SF, and if in i.a. one can get to depth of only 10-11 ply with Lc0 vs. 40 ply on SF, what is the point of the Lc0 exercise in competitive chess?
> If Lc0 is quite a bit weaker than SF, and if in i.a. one can get to depth of only 10-11 ply with Lc0 vs. 40 ply on SF, what is the point of the Lc0 exercise in competitive chess?
So there are two big differences between Lc0 and SF. First, the search is different, Lc0 does some kind of self-play game roll-out behind the scenes and SF does a classical search. So "depth 10" will mean very different things to both engines.
Secondly, the evaluation function is very different. SF has a good, relatively light weight, set of bonuses and penalties for all kinds of positional factors (knight in the corner = penalty; big pawn centre = bonus). Lc0 has learnt its own and we don't really know what it is. But the big thing is: it's self learning and will get better.
SF has improved faster than any other classical engine I know of in recent years, but Lc0 has improved much faster even than Stockfish. So the real issue is: maybe in 2-3 months Lc0 will catch up SF...we don't know. But we have to try to find out.
It is fascinating to read thru that forum. To see how they "bake bread".
lc0 forum - https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/lczero
I am a "lurker" there, don't know enough to even understand half of what they talk about. But it is interesting anyway.
Suppose one possible next move leads to 200,000 rollouts where 199,999 are wins and one that loses by force.
It seems to me if the move is rejected then we are back to alpha/beta search, and if it is not then it is a blind spot that will be exploited by traditional engines.
To make it more difficult, what if the forced loss wasn't within the horizon, like the move leads to an exchange down ending that is a forced loss after 80 more moves?
What is your source for the latest LC0 engine and what parameters do you set when adding it into Aquarium?
Or is this idea a waste of time--to use LC0 engine for i.a. analysis--unless one has a decent video card in the system?
I tried using a development page to download from, but I stopped using it because it was too buggy (not quite the right word, but kind of). I no longer have that url. Perhaps someone else has it. I think it is in another thread here on this board (someone gave it to me here).
Personally, I don't think lc0 is quite ready for prime time yet... and I certainly need a better graphics card. From what I understand, the graphics card power is VERY important. When the card was wonky during the TCEC tournament, lc0 had a spate of bad games until it was fixed. So a very big deal.
And I think they were using dual GT 1080 Ti for lc0 in that event.
Thanks much for the link and recap of your experience with lc0 so far.
How to do that? (Thanks.)
I have not tried Leela specifically, but my general method is to assign the IA tree in the engine properties section (change it from default to something specific) and then add that tree to a tree configuration in the Sandbox.
Not sure if it's correct, of course.
Powered by mwForum 2.27.4 © 1999-2012 Markus Wichitill