←back to thread

Grandmaster-level chess without search

(github.com)
365 points lawrenceyan | 2 comments | 17 Oct 24 19:13 UTC | HN request time: 0.512s | source
Show context
tzs ◴[17 Oct 24 22:06 UTC] No.41874291[source]▶
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 enough but it generally feels like they were still outplaying you for much of the game and you won because they made one or two blunders.

What I want is a computer opponent that plays at a level of my choosing but plays a game that feels like that of a typical human player of that level.

Are there such engines?

replies(17): >>41874316 #>>41874396 #>>41874461 #>>41875345 #>>41875558 #>>41875838 #>>41875964 #>>41876292 #>>41876599 #>>41877326 #>>41877679 #>>41877852 #>>41879309 #>>41880419 #>>41881695 #>>41883667 #>>41888465 #
gcr ◴[18 Oct 24 13:33 UTC] No.41879309[source]▶
Stockfish is the classic answer, though I’m not sure how well it’s graded. Someone must have a “Stockfish strength”-to-ELO mapping.
replies(1): >>41879933 #
1. tzs ◴[18 Oct 24 14:47 UTC] No.41879933[source]▶
It's not getting an engine to play in the right rating range that is the problem. It's getting it to play like a human would play in that rating range.

The average rating of tournament chess players in the US is around USCF 1550. I'm not sure what their FIDE rating would be. FIDE ratings are usually 50-100 points lower than USCF ratings but that's based on comparing people that have both ratings which for the most part are strong masters and above.

A human with a USCF 1550 rating will typically be mostly making moves that are suboptimal in a variety of ways: piece coordination, king safety, planning, pawn structure, development, search, and more. Basically they are around 1550 at nearly everything. There will be variations of course. A particular player might be worse at king safety and better at tactics for instance, but it will be something like they handle king safety like a 1400 and tactics like a 1700.

With a GM level engine turned down to 1550 you tend to see aspects of GM level play still in its game. If you are a 1550 playing against it it doesn't feel like you playing the kind of opponent you will play if you enter a local chess tournament and get paired with another 1450-1650 player.

It feels like you are playing someone with a totally different approach to chess than you who just happens to lose or draw to you about the same amount as a 1450-1650 human.

replies(1): >>41882026 #
2. Out_of_Characte ◴[18 Oct 24 18:18 UTC] No.41882026[source]▶
What I find fasinating is how bad human beings are at chess. Now that we have engines we're finally able to analise every game ever played and they show us everything in chess that we're blind to. Their ability to never blunder in 1 or 3 moves is admirable, and better than most players, and to say nothing about their ability to make you play out the longest possible chain before checkmate. What I found most insulting is when I played against the best bot I could beat, it gave up its rook for free.