10 ms·

Top Chess Engine Championship

87 points by AugurCognito 5y ago

CWuestefeld 5y ago
Other than the board, that page is completely opaque to me. There's a whole bunch of what are apparently technical stats, but I can't even infer enough to know whether big numbers are good or bad. This would be a whole lot more engaging with more explanation, at least hover tips over all the fields and so forth.
- A-Train 5y ago
  Yes you are right it is not a very good UX. For me the most interesting part is observing the evaluations of the position from the perspective of 2 engines. See the charts that track it move by move. It is often the case that one engine sees something that other doesn't. For example, say, that it is completely busted. I imagine internal dialogue: I'm fine, I'm fine, am I in trouble... oh $^#^ I'm losing now. It was especially true in the early days of neural chess engines which saw ideas which were well beyond the event horizon of traditional engines. Most people who are watching these tournaments on twitch are chess engine developers themselves that's why interfaces like these are fine for them.
- powera 5y ago
  The top line "eval" number is who is winning - positive means white is winning and negative means black is winning. "TC" is the time control - right now they are playing at 30 minutes + 5 seconds per move (for each side). Most of the other numbers are diagnostics about the chess engine's calculations. Generally, their audience is "people who play chess" - and those people can be assumed to know this. If you don't play chess, watching a broadcast on Twitch or YouTube will be more enjoyable.
- syoc 5y ago
  This website is niche enough that I think they are better of optimizing for what in-the-know users want than dumbing it down for people passing by. I recognize that is not really what you are asking for though, and I agree that they could do better with tool-tips and the likes.
isaacfrond 5y ago
The Top Chess Engine Championship (TCEC) is a computer chess tournament. The goal is to provide the viewers with a live broadcast of long time control, quality chess - played strictly between computer chess engines created by different programmers. One Season is divided into several Stages and lasts about 3-4 months. The winner of the Season will be the TCEC Grand Champion. They are current playing to lowest league--the qualification league. There will be several leagues culminating in a superfinal. 100 matches between the two best engines. It will be exiting to see how the conventional tree search, neural network and NNUE engines compare this year.
- tialaramex 5y ago
  > live broadcast As in, real time to the computation? Why though. The SC2 bots don't compete in real time, many of them can't, most of those that can are clearly hampered when playing against a human (necessarily real time) versus a machine (not real time), but you just watch the matches as if they'd happened in real time after the game is finished. Why not just have a fixed pace unrelated to how long the moves "really" took to calculate, with a (no longer real time) clock shown to indicate how the machines used their allotted time?
  - InsiciveMe 5y ago
    You got a point too, umm
  - evandijk70 5y ago
    I am not sure how the SC2 bots work, but chess engines always play in 'real time'. They already play at a decent level with 100 ms thinking time, and longer time controls mean higher quality moves.
  - irishsultan 5y ago
    > As in, real time to the computation? Why though. Why not? What have SC2 bots (or their abilities) to do with chess bots? > Why not just have a fixed pace unrelated to how long the moves "really" took to calculate, with a (no longer real time) clock shown to indicate how the machines used their allotted time? You can't show moves that haven't been played yet, so either your pace is much too slow, or you have to wait until the game is finished before displaying it. And it still wouldn't make sense to display the moves in a fixed pace when the pace (and time pressure) is in fact part of the game (see also the recent human world championship where many blunders were often played just before the 40th move because of time pressure).
gringoDan 5y ago
Stockfish has won in the past 5 seasons. Interesting project – their open source engine is used on both Chess.com and Lichess. https://www.chess.com/terms/stockfish-chess-engine https://www.chess.com/terms/stockfish-chess-engine https://github.com/official-stockfish/Stockfish https://github.com/official-stockfish/Stockfish
- anton-107 5y ago
  Would be interesting to see AlphaZero in this contest, but I don't think it is open source [1] How AlphaZero Completely CRUSHED Stockfish https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8dT6CR9_6l4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8dT6CR9_6l4
  - Icko 5y ago
    Perhaps someone submitted LeelaZero at some point?
    - sebzim4500 5y ago
      Yeah Leela even one once in 2019. Since stockfish moved to a hybrid approach (conventional evaluation + neural network) it has been unstoppable though.
  - baxyl 5y ago
    That was against an old version of Stockfish. Both Stockfish and Leela are much stronger now than AlphaZero.
    - civilized 5y ago
      ...because they adopted neural network enhancements inspired by AlphaZero, or so I hear.
      - buzzy_hacker 5y ago
        That’s correct, but Stockfish uses neutral nets differently than AlphaZero.
jvsg_ 5y ago
is there anything of this sort, but for go?
systemvoltage 5y ago
How does Chess engine timing work? Do chess engines strategically use up their time depending on the complexity or the criticality of the position? Do both chess engines have equal machine power, cores, IOPS, CPU model, RAM, etc? They're showing a game with an eval bar. How does it evaluate the position, don't you need a chess engine to evaluate and provide a score in the first place? Perhaps we're seeing two chess engines play against each other with a third one evaluating for the viewers? Is it the average evaluation between the two engines?
- A-Train 5y ago
  To some extent it depends on the settings of the tournament because engines can work in the background and analyse position while it is not their turn. It is called ponder. Time management is based on some heuristics built into the engine. Some positions that are being evaluated are more dynamic and engines have rules to evaluate positions which are settled down. As for the hardware if 2 CPU engines are playing they have exactly the same resources. The problem arises when one engine is GPU based and the other is CPU. In this situations balancing the compute power is hard but even then they normally have the same time allocated.
- pk2200 5y ago
  For time management, the rough approach is to allocate a fixed % of the remaining time and increase or reduce it, mostly depending on the stability of the evaluation with increasing search depth. Games are played on the same computer, with only one engine analyzing at a time. The graph shows each engine's evaluation of the position for each move in the game. The red line is from a 3rd engine "observing" the game.
- MauranKilom 5y ago
  > Do chess engines strategically use up their time depending on the complexity or the criticality of the position? Yes, this has been something engines have started to optimize. Some engines that don't do this well can be beaten by "flagging" (i.e. making pointless moves rapidly) once they run low on time. > Do both chess engines have equal machine power, cores, IOPS, CPU model, RAM, etc? Last I remember, the goal was to give engines roughly equal computational capacity. But it would be tailored to the engine, e.g. AlphaZero getting something with more GPU(s) and StockFish getting (at the time) more CPU(s) - at least for the final matches. > They're showing a game with an eval bar For me, it shows the current evaluation of both engines (numerically), as well as a graph with up to four engine evaluations (the two contestants + up to two "commentators").

87 points by AugurCognito 5y ago

Other than the board, that page is completely opaque to me. There's a whole bunch of what are apparently technical stats, but I can't even infer enough to know whether big numbers are good or bad. This would be a whole lot more engaging with more explanation, at least hover tips over all the fields and so forth.

A-Train 5y ago
Yes you are right it is not a very good UX. For me the most interesting part is observing the evaluations of the position from the perspective of 2 engines. See the charts that track it move by move. It is often the case that one engine sees something that other doesn't. For example, say, that it is completely busted. I imagine internal dialogue: I'm fine, I'm fine, am I in trouble... oh $^#^ I'm losing now. It was especially true in the early days of neural chess engines which saw ideas which were well beyond the event horizon of traditional engines. Most people who are watching these tournaments on twitch are chess engine developers themselves that's why interfaces like these are fine for them.
powera 5y ago
The top line "eval" number is who is winning - positive means white is winning and negative means black is winning. "TC" is the time control - right now they are playing at 30 minutes + 5 seconds per move (for each side). Most of the other numbers are diagnostics about the chess engine's calculations. Generally, their audience is "people who play chess" - and those people can be assumed to know this. If you don't play chess, watching a broadcast on Twitch or YouTube will be more enjoyable.
syoc 5y ago
This website is niche enough that I think they are better of optimizing for what in-the-know users want than dumbing it down for people passing by. I recognize that is not really what you are asking for though, and I agree that they could do better with tool-tips and the likes.

isaacfrond 5y ago

The Top Chess Engine Championship (TCEC) is a computer chess tournament. The goal is to provide the viewers with a live broadcast of long time control, quality chess - played strictly between computer chess engines created by different programmers. One Season is divided into several Stages and lasts about 3-4 months. The winner of the Season will be the TCEC Grand Champion. They are current playing to lowest league--the qualification league. There will be several leagues culminating in a superfinal. 100 matches between the two best engines. It will be exiting to see how the conventional tree search, neural network and NNUE engines compare this year.

tialaramex 5y ago
> live broadcast As in, real time to the computation? Why though. The SC2 bots don't compete in real time, many of them can't, most of those that can are clearly hampered when playing against a human (necessarily real time) versus a machine (not real time), but you just watch the matches as if they'd happened in real time after the game is finished. Why not just have a fixed pace unrelated to how long the moves "really" took to calculate, with a (no longer real time) clock shown to indicate how the machines used their allotted time?
- InsiciveMe 5y ago
  You got a point too, umm
- evandijk70 5y ago
  I am not sure how the SC2 bots work, but chess engines always play in 'real time'. They already play at a decent level with 100 ms thinking time, and longer time controls mean higher quality moves.
- irishsultan 5y ago
  > As in, real time to the computation? Why though. Why not? What have SC2 bots (or their abilities) to do with chess bots? > Why not just have a fixed pace unrelated to how long the moves "really" took to calculate, with a (no longer real time) clock shown to indicate how the machines used their allotted time? You can't show moves that haven't been played yet, so either your pace is much too slow, or you have to wait until the game is finished before displaying it. And it still wouldn't make sense to display the moves in a fixed pace when the pace (and time pressure) is in fact part of the game (see also the recent human world championship where many blunders were often played just before the 40th move because of time pressure).

gringoDan 5y ago

Stockfish has won in the past 5 seasons. Interesting project – their open source engine is used on both Chess.com and Lichess. https://www.chess.com/terms/stockfish-chess-engine https://www.chess.com/terms/stockfish-chess-engine https://github.com/official-stockfish/Stockfish https://github.com/official-stockfish/Stockfish

anton-107 5y ago
Would be interesting to see AlphaZero in this contest, but I don't think it is open source [1] How AlphaZero Completely CRUSHED Stockfish https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8dT6CR9_6l4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8dT6CR9_6l4
- Icko 5y ago
  Perhaps someone submitted LeelaZero at some point?
  - sebzim4500 5y ago
    Yeah Leela even one once in 2019. Since stockfish moved to a hybrid approach (conventional evaluation + neural network) it has been unstoppable though.
- baxyl 5y ago
  That was against an old version of Stockfish. Both Stockfish and Leela are much stronger now than AlphaZero.
  - civilized 5y ago
    ...because they adopted neural network enhancements inspired by AlphaZero, or so I hear.
    - buzzy_hacker 5y ago
      That’s correct, but Stockfish uses neutral nets differently than AlphaZero.

jvsg_ 5y ago

is there anything of this sort, but for go?

systemvoltage 5y ago

How does Chess engine timing work? Do chess engines strategically use up their time depending on the complexity or the criticality of the position? Do both chess engines have equal machine power, cores, IOPS, CPU model, RAM, etc? They're showing a game with an eval bar. How does it evaluate the position, don't you need a chess engine to evaluate and provide a score in the first place? Perhaps we're seeing two chess engines play against each other with a third one evaluating for the viewers? Is it the average evaluation between the two engines?

A-Train 5y ago
To some extent it depends on the settings of the tournament because engines can work in the background and analyse position while it is not their turn. It is called ponder. Time management is based on some heuristics built into the engine. Some positions that are being evaluated are more dynamic and engines have rules to evaluate positions which are settled down. As for the hardware if 2 CPU engines are playing they have exactly the same resources. The problem arises when one engine is GPU based and the other is CPU. In this situations balancing the compute power is hard but even then they normally have the same time allocated.
pk2200 5y ago
For time management, the rough approach is to allocate a fixed % of the remaining time and increase or reduce it, mostly depending on the stability of the evaluation with increasing search depth. Games are played on the same computer, with only one engine analyzing at a time. The graph shows each engine's evaluation of the position for each move in the game. The red line is from a 3rd engine "observing" the game.
MauranKilom 5y ago
> Do chess engines strategically use up their time depending on the complexity or the criticality of the position? Yes, this has been something engines have started to optimize. Some engines that don't do this well can be beaten by "flagging" (i.e. making pointless moves rapidly) once they run low on time. > Do both chess engines have equal machine power, cores, IOPS, CPU model, RAM, etc? Last I remember, the goal was to give engines roughly equal computational capacity. But it would be tailored to the engine, e.g. AlphaZero getting something with more GPU(s) and StockFish getting (at the time) more CPU(s) - at least for the final matches. > They're showing a game with an eval bar For me, it shows the current evaluation of both engines (numerically), as well as a graph with up to four engine evaluations (the two contestants + up to two "commentators").