mot524

4 ms·

1.
by mot524 7y ago
I told you that intra-thread communication will ruin chess engine efficiency, and in your reply, all you do is talk more about stuff that requires intra-thread communication (tasks, futures, promises, etc.). You might think that all I'
2.
by mot524 7y ago
I already told you that intra-thread synchronization is to be avoided but you're still talking about it (promises, futures, tasks, etc.) so I don't know what to say. Nothing you're saying is going to work like you think it is
3.
by mot524 7y ago
Okay, as long as we're not arguing, I will tell you that any sort of fine-grained intra-thread communication is to be avoided like the plague in computer chess. Engines are able to search millions of positions per second... most multit
4.
by mot524 7y ago
I've already spent a bunch of time explaining to you why this won't work. But hey, apparently you're the expert. If you want to reimplement Stockfish on a GPU such than it's faster than a CPU then nobody's stopping
5.
by mot524 7y ago
Like I've been saying, you don't know what you want to q-search next until you've finished the last q-search. So you can't make a q-search queue because you couldn't add anything to the queue until the previous addi
6.
by mot524 7y ago
I know exactly how much divergence there is because I'm the author of a chess engine and I've spent weeks/months looking at traces of my engine's tree searches. I think what you're not getting is what a chess engine
7.
by mot524 7y ago
I think you misunderstand how "processing a node" works. It's a recursive algorithm. Even if you correctly identify an ALL node (which is not always easy) and say "hey process all these moves at the same time" then
8.
by mot524 7y ago
Yes, parallel search is possible, but inefficient. Searching with e.g. 32 cores already cuts efficiency in half, in most useful scenarios (i.e., where the best move changes), and it gets worse from there. But regardless, it seems you have a
9.
by mot524 7y ago
I believe LC0 was being run on dual RTX 2080 Tis and Stockfish was being run on "43 cores" which I take to mean a workstation with dual Intel 22-core processors. So you're talking about two $1200 graphics cards vs. two $3000+
10.
by mot524 7y ago
Implementing Stockfish's evaluation function on a GPU is almost certainly possible, but stupid. Stockfish is able to evaluate several million nodes per second. By the time it identified a position to evaluate and copied it to the GPU,
11.
by mot524 7y ago
The problem is that tree searching is largely serial, in the sense of, you don't know the next position you want to search until you finish searching the previous position. So you can't just send a million positions to a GPU to ev
12.
by mot524 7y ago
I believe AlphaZero's CNN uses 40 residual layers and LC0 uses 20 layers. So in theory, AlphaZero could have twice as much chess knowledge. So that's a reason to believe that AlphaZero might be stronger than LC0. But there's
13.
by mot524 7y ago
Training AlphaZero for more than 4 hours on DeepMind's system didn't improve its strength. Makes you wonder if that's as close to ideal chess as we're ever going to get...
14.
by mot524 7y ago
Except that LC0 wins decisively against all other engines too. You just hear about the wins vs. Stockfish because Stockfish is the best conventional engine so that's more newsworthy.