4 ms·
The big problem with that paper is that grandmaster level chess is actually really bad for a chess bot. Its elo is a full 400 lower than Stockfish[0], which is
by matteoraso 3y ago
The big problem with that paper is that grandmaster level chess is actually really bad for a chess bot. Its elo is a full 400 lower than Stockfish[0], which is the same distance between a grandmaster and a very strong untitled player. Oddly enough, I wrote a blog post a few months ago that's tangentially related to this topic[1]. The gist of it is that the search tree for a chess engine is the most important part, since a perfect solution for chess would just be a brute-force search of the entire game tree. Trying to get around that by building a better evaluation function is just a waste of time and money.
[0] https://arxiv.org/pdf/2402.04494.pdf https://arxiv.org/pdf/2402.04494.pdf
[1] https://matteoraso.github.io/board-game-engines-are-about-trees-not-evaluation-functions.html#board-game-engines-are-about-trees-not-evaluation-functions https://matteoraso.github.io/board-game-engines-are-about-tr...
- GaggiX 3y agoWhen NNUE replaced the human heuristic of the evaluation function in Stockfish 12 the model got a huge jump in playing strength (around 100 Elo), so building a better evaluation function is definitely not a waste of time and money.
- matteoraso 3y agoI worded that really badly. Obviously, making a better evaluation function is good, but you can't try and use it to replace the search tree.