I am not too familiar with the pro chess world nor the AI chess world. But did anybody try yet to make the AI always try to achieve a draw?
Somewhat related, a variant of chess where the objective is to lose:
Stockfish 14
181–190 of 207 posts
Re: Stockfish 14
#182Earlier 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…
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
Chess engines destroy humans at speed chess. The time use creeps in if you're using a low-tech method of cheating (i.e. manually punching moves into your engine and the website).
Re: Stockfish 14
#183I 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…
> 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
This statement seems a bit funny because in order to have a good idea that they cheated, you would have also had to been analyzing the game with the chess engine.
Regardless, unless you truly an amazingly player, nearly any chess engine made in the last 15 years will destroy you and incremental improvements on stockfish have absolutely not effect on that.
Re: Stockfish 14
#184Earlier quoted context omitted.
Given that AlphaZero will presumably never be publicly available, I think you might be interested in TCEC which has fair fights between Stockfish and LeelaChessZero (which Stockfish has won recently).
> I think you might be interested in TCEC which has fair fights between Stockfish and LeelaChessZero This is pretty questionable in my judgment, actually. TCEC's GPU hardware is 4x Nvidia V100 data center class GPUs, with a pretty powerful processor to boot. A quick search suggests that ONE of these will run you close to $10k, so we're talking about an all-in system worth mid five figures. Meanwhile, the CPU hardware…
TCECs goal is to keep the ratios similar to the AlphaZero paper, not price or power or other benchmark. Increasing the hardware of one would require an increase of the hardware of the other. But, the hardware is donated, so it's hard to be too critical.
But why are we comparing used 2021 prices when these hardware weren't purchased in today's market? Especially when GPUs are 1.5-2x MSRP right now. Even very old GPU prices are insane. I recently sold a 980ti near what I purchased it new. 4669v4 MSRP was $7k, so they are not far off. The V100 is pretty dated too as it is from 2017, and doesn't have FP16 which is heavily used by Leela. For this and several other reasons, a single 3090 is actually faster than 4x v100s according to their own bechmarks[1]. A single v100 is approximately equal to a 3080 or 2080ti in performance.
Maybe you should also checkout the CCCC[2] hardware which is even stronger for both: 2x A100 vs 2x AMD EPYC 7H12
[1]: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1lGFf6PLGmBUSMan-YP7V...
Re: Stockfish 14
#185I 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…
> 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 This statement seems a bit funny because in order to have a good idea that they cheated, you would have also had to been analyzing the game with the chess engine. Regardless, unless you truly an amazingly player, nearly any chess engine made in th…
> This statement seems a bit funny because in order to have a good idea that they cheated, you would have also had to been analyzing the game with the chess engine.
You analyze the game after it is played. When your opponent managed to have a 99.9% accuracy in a 1500+ ELO blitz/rapid game, it's highly unlikely that they managed to do that without some computer assistance.
Re: Stockfish 14
#186Earlier quoted context omitted.
Given that AlphaZero will presumably never be publicly available, I think you might be interested in TCEC which has fair fights between Stockfish and LeelaChessZero (which Stockfish has won recently).
> I think you might be interested in TCEC which has fair fights between Stockfish and LeelaChessZero This is pretty questionable in my judgment, actually. TCEC's GPU hardware is 4x Nvidia V100 data center class GPUs, with a pretty powerful processor to boot. A quick search suggests that ONE of these will run you close to $10k, so we're talking about an all-in system worth mid five figures. Meanwhile, the CPU hardware…
I think TCEC is as close to a fair fight as you're going to get. Obviously, it can't be perfect. A few caveats to your comments (which I mostly agree with). One is that it's easy to add GPUs to a high end machine than CPUs. I'm surprised a 4-socket motherboard (evidently) exists. Secondly, at the consumer level, you can use a consumer GPU with similar processing power as the datacenter GPUs for much cheaper.
Re: Stockfish 14
#187I 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…
I've built a cheat detection system for chess few years ago. Our client paid for creating a chess portal to play chess for money (not an idea I'd put my money into - and it's been dead after few months). Anticheat engine has worked like that: - simulate a game using stockfish - for each move (except few moves at the beginning) compare the move made by player with the list suggested by engine - if the move chosen by p…
And after a player has been labeled as a cheater, start matching them with other cheaters exclusively.
Re: Stockfish 14
#188Earlier quoted context omitted.
> 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 y…
At least on lichess, the blunder/mistake/inaccuracy distinction is based only on how much the evaluation moves. Going from +10 to +6 is still a blunder.
Re: Stockfish 14
#189I am not too familiar with the pro chess world nor the AI chess world. But did anybody try yet to make the AI always try to achieve a draw?
I think the most anticlimatic, but most effective way to make such an AI would be to run an engine like stockfish at maximum strength to turn a game into an endgame, and then use the endgame tables to convert the game to a forced draw.
Re: Stockfish 14
#190I 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…
I've built a cheat detection system for chess few years ago. Our client paid for creating a chess portal to play chess for money (not an idea I'd put my money into - and it's been dead after few months). Anticheat engine has worked like that: - simulate a game using stockfish - for each move (except few moves at the beginning) compare the move made by player with the list suggested by engine - if the move chosen by p…
Just wanted to propose this approach. But I wouldn't call it cheat detection. It's more of "make sure my opponent is not better than X". It could even be integrated into the game by showing the players "forbidden" moves, which are too good for the current game-level and are therefore not allowed to be played.