61–70 of 171 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What’s your rating, have you tried gpt4o? It’s supposedly good up to about 1300, but aside from that the ability to prompt can make the style of play somewhat tunable for ex aggressive, defensive, etc.
Do you know if there are any interfaces to play against got4o? Or is it just typing in algebraic moves back and forth?
OT: what's the state of the art in non-GM level computer chess? Say I want to play chess with an opponent that is at about the same skill level as me, or perhaps I want to play with an opponent about 100 rating points above me for training. Most engines let you dumb them down by cutting search depth, but that usually doesn't work well. Sure, you end up beating them about half the time if you cut the search down enoug…
As far as I can tell, they got rid of this feature. It was the only computer opponent that felt real. Like it made a human mistake when put under pressure, rather than just playing like a computer and randomly deciding to play stupid.
OT: what's the state of the art in non-GM level computer chess? Say I want to play chess with an opponent that is at about the same skill level as me, or perhaps I want to play with an opponent about 100 rating points above me for training. Most engines let you dumb them down by cutting search depth, but that usually doesn't work well. Sure, you end up beating them about half the time if you cut the search down enoug…
I built something like this. It works as long as you're not too high-rated: chessmate.ai. Once players get higher rated it is more difficult to predict their moves because you need to model their search process, not just their intuitive move choice. It's also possible to train on one player's games only so that it is more personalized. It uses a similar approach to Maia but with a different neural network, so it had…
I'm curious how you combined Stockfish with your own model - but no worries if you're keeping the secret sauce a secret. All the best to you in building out this app!
OT: what's the state of the art in non-GM level computer chess? Say I want to play chess with an opponent that is at about the same skill level as me, or perhaps I want to play with an opponent about 100 rating points above me for training. Most engines let you dumb them down by cutting search depth, but that usually doesn't work well. Sure, you end up beating them about half the time if you cut the search down enoug…
I forget the rough adjustment factors, but it is worth noting that lichess Elo is not the same as chess.com or FIDE. I think lichess is typically ~300 points above chess.com. This implies the model is around 2500 blitz vs humans. As blitz elo are often much higher than in classical time controls, 2500 elo on chess.com places it firmly in the 'good but not great' level. I am very curious to know whether the model suff…
> I think lichess is typically ~300 points above chess.com. Yeah, no. They are two different rating systems (not ELO incidentally) with different curves, there isn't a fixed difference you can apply. At the high end of the scale lichess ratings are below, not above, chess.com ratings. E.g. Magnus Carlsen is 3131 blitz on lichess [0], 3294 blitz on chess.com [1]. This website [2] tries to translate between the sites,…