Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Stockfish 14

stockfishchess.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 207 posts

Re: Stockfish 14

#171

Post by anikan_vader »

dangero wrote: post #77
anikan_vader wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think reaching 1400 elo after a year of decent study after learning the rules is not too unreasonable. To reach 1400 in a year you would need to be either talented or hard-working. Climbing the elo ladder does get much harder though, as you mentioned. To reach 2000 in two years you would need to be both hard-working and talented. To reach 2850 in a lifetime you have to be hard-working, talented, and a particular No…

In which format? I highly doubt that someone could do that in bullet unless they played full time. Bullet players are already on average a higher percentile of chess players so the elo is skewed

It's generally thought that beginners improve most quickly by playing slower chess (e.g. 15+10 or even 30+20). If you're a 1000 and you only play bullet, you may end up cementing some of your bad habits. Whereas with slower time controls, one has time to calculate some deeper lines and really try to understand the position. And if one spends a year getting to 1400 in rapid, one will find that one's gains from slower time controls will quickly bare fruit in the lower time controls (once you learn time management).

Generally speaking, players playing bullet are more interested in having fun and less interested in gaining elo (which of course is totally fine).

Re: Stockfish 14

#172

Post by super_mario »

make3 wrote: post #12
cellis wrote: post #2

Translation: Alpha Zero, we're ready for a rematch!

but.. they're using a pretty big neural net themselves (NNEU) as far as I can tell? With datasets of hundreds of Gigs. Doesn't this remove the significance of the matchup, that was supposed to be about Deep Learning vs more traditional chess bot methods? Claiming that something that uses a neural net trained on hundreds of gigs of data isn't deep learning .. I mean it's possible, I don't know the details. What is it…

You can find out more about Stockfish's NNUE architecture and internal working here:

https://github.com/glinscott/nnue-pytorch/blob/master/docs/n...

It's pretty interesting read.

Re: Stockfish 14

#173

Post by sobellian »

vfc1 wrote: post #107

I feel like I've been playing against it a lot in chess.com, with the tremendous amount of cheating that is going on online, every 1 out of 6 or 7 games is an engine user (I know because I report them, and they get banned). It's great to have a better engine, but I feel that would benefit the most the online chess community is not a better engine, but an open source cheat detection system, if that's even possible. I…

There is such an open source system: https://github.com/clarkerubber/irwin. It seems that the last commit was some years ago, so it's either very stable or no longer used. At any rate, this is what powers anticheat on lichess.org.

Re: Stockfish 14

#174

Post by ttctciyf »

nemz44 wrote: post #168
mewpmewp2 wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's odd that it would be 1 out of 6 or 7, because when high elo streamers like Hikaru or Chessbrah are doing speed runs, they very often go on a 100 win streak, which sounds exceedingly unlikely if the odds of facing an engine user would be 1 out of 6/7. An engine user would definitely beat them, unless they were using it sparingly of course, which can be, but I don't think it would be that obvious for you in this c…

Hikaru and Chessbrah are playing at GM level. It'd be difficult to cheat at this level. Every player tends to recognise every other player, and it takes time to climb to this elo. A far more representative example would be to observe games from a NM or IM. These guys often bump into cheaters. 1 in 6/7 isn't unrealistic.

> playing at GM level

Not always. Hikaru does speedruns[1] using an alt acct with entry-level ELO to race to ELO 3000. I've watched a fair bit of this, and seen him encounter the odd cheater or suspect game, but much nearer 1% than 10% of the time.

1: e.g.: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iOd222WIEk8

Re: Stockfish 14

#175

Post by muzani »

FartyMcFarter wrote: post #150
muzani wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A blunder is when someone makes a wrong move then and there that costs them the game. At AI levels, there are very few, if any, blunders. I think parent commenter means a strategic mistake, where they made a mistake about 5 moves in advance.

> A blunder is when someone makes a wrong move then and there that costs them the game. Not quite, as that would imply that each game has at most one blunder. It's quite possible for two players to blunder back and forth multiple times.

True. The technical definition of a blunder on lichess and chess.com is that it puts you in a losing position. You can blunder further while in the losing position. And your opponent can blunder which puts them in the losing position, only to be reversed by your blunder.

A mistake is like a blunder but you're still winning, but it could be a blunder in a worse position. An inaccuracy is a bad move that doesn't cost you.

Re: Stockfish 14

#176

Post by Tenoke »

mpol wrote: post #155
mewpmewp2 wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe, but there are also few rapid "speed" runs, like from Daniel Naroditsky, while he has also faced cheaters, it doesn't seem 1 out of 7. And Daniel Naroditsky definitely would have good internal cheating detection even when the user does it sparingly, as he can basically understand most lower rated opponent moves, and if it seems too good for this rating, he can know this from just few moves. Check Daniel's rapid…

Different crowds probably. Not sure what the aim of cheating is, probably going from a rating of 1500 to 2000 and the status that it brings. In the end you still win 50% of the games, just against higher rated players. Playing against a GM would reveal your cheating instantly, it seems. It's like robbing the police station :)

People like steamrolling. It's part of why higher rated players smurf (for theirs and/or their audience's enjoyment) and do 'speedruns' in chess and most online games with ranking.

Re: Stockfish 14

#177

Post by andrepd »

Jarmsy wrote: post #125
fridif wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Probably most of the improvements in 14 are for arriving at a more accurate answer quickly for play against other machines When you play stockfish at a human level, it is purposely choosing an answer it knows is worse ^.^

My impression from playing against lower levels of the default stockfish on Lichess is that it's really bad at playing badly, so not much fun to play against. It seems like it plays at full power, interspersed with random bad moves.

Absolutely. You might want to take a look at Maia Chess, an engine which is supposed to mimic low/mid-level human play, rather than just playing perfectly and with a 1/10 chance of a terrible move, like Stockfish at low levels does.

Re: Stockfish 14

#178

Post by [deleted] »

super_mario wrote: post #169
jaimex2 wrote: post #16

Rematch Alpha Zero. Have power consumption restraints. Go!

Alpha Zero would not be competitive in its original implementation. It's neural net is too small (this is why it only took 4 hours to train it, since it stopped learning after 4 hours). Stockfish 14 just doubled its network size from Stockfish 13. Stockfish 8 actually won games against Alpha Zero. But Stockfish 11 (which is still classical evaluation engine with no neural net support) totally decimates Stockfish 8, a…

[deleted]

Re: Stockfish 14

#179

Post by michaelt »

madflame991 wrote: post #108
vfc1 wrote: post #107

I feel like I've been playing against it a lot in chess.com, with the tremendous amount of cheating that is going on online, every 1 out of 6 or 7 games is an engine user (I know because I report them, and they get banned). It's great to have a better engine, but I feel that would benefit the most the online chess community is not a better engine, but an open source cheat detection system, if that's even possible. I…

How do you figure out they're using an engine? Are there obvious human moves and AI moves?

Well, obviously it's impossible to know with 100% certainty. Some heuristics include:

* Some cheaters will just 100% match the best engine moves. If a player consistently does exactly what Stockfish would do that's an obvious giveaway.

* Some cheaters will be manually copying moves between the chess website and their engine; in high-speed games ('blitz' and 'bullet' chess) their abilities plummet when there are only a few seconds left on the clock, because they can't copy fast enough.

* Similarly, a player who takes 5 seconds a move whether they're pounding out a basic book opening or making an inspired move in an extremely complicated situation will raise suspicion.

* Some cheaters will just be improbably good for their known background. A few weeks back some billionaire beat five-time world champion Vishy Anand in a charity game (where Anand played a bunch of different games at once) which is the chess equivalent of Mark Zuckerberg outrunning Usain Bolt.

* Chess engines will sometimes make moves that even the top humans fail to see. All the action is happening on the right of the board, and some innocuous move on the left of the board produces a perfectly executed forced mate in 15 moves? Some people will look at that suspiciously.

Of course, a sufficiently careful cheater could cheat without triggering any of these heuristics - a player who only relies on the engine for one or two key moves can easily be undetectable.

Re: Stockfish 14

#180

Post by vc9999 »

mewpmewp2 wrote: post #119
vfc1 wrote: post #107

I feel like I've been playing against it a lot in chess.com, with the tremendous amount of cheating that is going on online, every 1 out of 6 or 7 games is an engine user (I know because I report them, and they get banned). It's great to have a better engine, but I feel that would benefit the most the online chess community is not a better engine, but an open source cheat detection system, if that's even possible. I…

It's odd that it would be 1 out of 6 or 7, because when high elo streamers like Hikaru or Chessbrah are doing speed runs, they very often go on a 100 win streak, which sounds exceedingly unlikely if the odds of facing an engine user would be 1 out of 6/7. An engine user would definitely beat them, unless they were using it sparingly of course, which can be, but I don't think it would be that obvious for you in this c…

Speed runs are 3min game, or even less.

It's much hard to cheat in 3minutes games. The chess engine takes somes time to think about the next move

Post reply on HN