Game Changer
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
The 12Th Top Chess Engine Championship
TCEC12: the 12th Top Chess Engine Championship Article Accepted Version Haworth, G. and Hernandez, N. (2019) TCEC12: the 12th Top Chess Engine Championship. ICGA Journal, 41 (1). pp. 24-30. ISSN 1389-6911 doi: https://doi.org/10.3233/ICG-190090 Available at http://centaur.reading.ac.uk/76985/ It is advisable to refer to the publisher’s version if you intend to cite from the work. See Guidance on citing . To link to this article DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3233/ICG-190090 Publisher: The International Computer Games Association All outputs in CentAUR are protected by Intellectual Property Rights law, including copyright law. Copyright and IPR is retained by the creators or other copyright holders. Terms and conditions for use of this material are defined in the End User Agreement . www.reading.ac.uk/centaur CentAUR Central Archive at the University of Reading Reading’s research outputs online TCEC12: the 12th Top Chess Engine Championship Guy Haworth and Nelson Hernandez1 Reading, UK and Maryland, USA After the successes of TCEC Season 11 (Haworth and Hernandez, 2018a; TCEC, 2018), the Top Chess Engine Championship moved straight on to Season 12, starting April 18th 2018 with the same divisional structure if somewhat evolved. Five divisions, each of eight engines, played two or more ‘DRR’ double round robin phases each, with promotions and relegations following. Classic tempi gradually lengthened and the Premier division’s top two engines played a 100-game match to determine the Grand Champion. The strategy for the selection of mandated openings was finessed from division to division. -
(2021), 2814-2819 Research Article Can Chess Ever Be Solved Na
Turkish Journal of Computer and Mathematics Education Vol.12 No.2 (2021), 2814-2819 Research Article Can Chess Ever Be Solved Naveen Kumar1, Bhayaa Sharma2 1,2Department of Mathematics, University Institute of Sciences, Chandigarh University, Gharuan, Mohali, Punjab-140413, India [email protected], [email protected] Article History: Received: 11 January 2021; Accepted: 27 February 2021; Published online: 5 April 2021 Abstract: Data Science and Artificial Intelligence have been all over the world lately,in almost every possible field be it finance,education,entertainment,healthcare,astronomy, astrology, and many more sports is no exception. With so much data, statistics, and analysis available in this particular field, when everything is being recorded it has become easier for team selectors, broadcasters, audience, sponsors, most importantly for players themselves to prepare against various opponents. Even the analysis has improved over the period of time with the evolvement of AI, not only analysis one can even predict the things with the insights available. This is not even restricted to this,nowadays players are trained in such a manner that they are capable of taking the most feasible and rational decisions in any given situation. Chess is one of those sports that depend on calculations, algorithms, analysis, decisions etc. Being said that whenever the analysis is involved, we have always improvised on the techniques. Algorithms are somethingwhich can be solved with the help of various software, does that imply that chess can be fully solved,in simple words does that mean that if both the players play the best moves respectively then the game must end in a draw or does that mean that white wins having the first move advantage. -
The 17Th Top Chess Engine Championship: TCEC17
The 17th Top Chess Engine Championship: TCEC17 Guy Haworth1 and Nelson Hernandez Reading, UK and Maryland, USA TCEC Season 17 started on January 1st, 2020 with a radically new structure: classic ‘CPU’ engines with ‘Shannon AB’ ancestry and ‘GPU, neural network’ engines had their separate parallel routes to an enlarged Premier Division and the Superfinal. Figs. 1 and 3 and Table 1 provide the logos and details on the field of 40 engines. L1 L2{ QL Fig. 1. The logos for the engines originally in the Qualification League and Leagues 1 and 2. Through the generous sponsorship of ‘noobpwnftw’, TCEC benefitted from a significant platform upgrade. On the CPU side, 4x Intel (2016) Xeon 4xE5-4669v4 processors enabled 176 threads rather than the previous 43 and the Syzygy ‘EGT’ endgame tables were promoted from SSD to 1TB RAM. The previous Windows Server 2012 R2 operating system was replaced by CentOS Linux release 7.7.1908 (Core) as the latter eased the administrators’ tasks and enabled more nodes/sec in the engine- searches. The move to Linux challenged a number of engine authors who we hope will be back in TCEC18. 1 Corresponding author: [email protected] Table 1. The TCEC17 engines (CPW, 2020). Engine Initial CPU proto- Hash # EGTs Authors Final Tier ab Name Version Elo Tier thr. col Kb 01 AS AllieStein v0.5_timefix-n14.0 3936 P ? uci — Syz. Adam Treat and Mark Jordan → P 02 An Andscacs 0.95123 3750 1 176 uci 8,192 — Daniel José Queraltó → 1 03 Ar Arasan 22.0_f928f5c 3728 1 176 uci 16,384 Syz. -
Monte-Carlo Tree Search As Regularized Policy Optimization
Monte-Carlo tree search as regularized policy optimization Jean-Bastien Grill * 1 Florent Altche´ * 1 Yunhao Tang * 1 2 Thomas Hubert 3 Michal Valko 1 Ioannis Antonoglou 3 Remi´ Munos 1 Abstract AlphaZero employs an alternative handcrafted heuristic to achieve super-human performance on board games (Silver The combination of Monte-Carlo tree search et al., 2016). Recent MCTS-based MuZero (Schrittwieser (MCTS) with deep reinforcement learning has et al., 2019) has also led to state-of-the-art results in the led to significant advances in artificial intelli- Atari benchmarks (Bellemare et al., 2013). gence. However, AlphaZero, the current state- of-the-art MCTS algorithm, still relies on hand- Our main contribution is connecting MCTS algorithms, crafted heuristics that are only partially under- in particular the highly-successful AlphaZero, with MPO, stood. In this paper, we show that AlphaZero’s a state-of-the-art model-free policy-optimization algo- search heuristics, along with other common ones rithm (Abdolmaleki et al., 2018). Specifically, we show that such as UCT, are an approximation to the solu- the empirical visit distribution of actions in AlphaZero’s tion of a specific regularized policy optimization search procedure approximates the solution of a regularized problem. With this insight, we propose a variant policy-optimization objective. With this insight, our second of AlphaZero which uses the exact solution to contribution a modified version of AlphaZero that comes this policy optimization problem, and show exper- significant performance gains over the original algorithm, imentally that it reliably outperforms the original especially in cases where AlphaZero has been observed to algorithm in multiple domains. -
The 19Th Top Chess Engine Championship: TCEC19
The 19th Top Chess Engine Championship: TCEC19 Guy Haworth1 and Nelson Hernandez Reading, UK and Maryland, USA After some intriguing bonus matches in TCEC Season 18, the TCEC Season 19 Championship started on August 6th, 2020 (Haworth and Hernandez, 2020a/b; TCEC, 2020a/b). The league structure was unaltered except that the Qualification League was extended to 12 engines at the last moment. There were two promotions and demotions throughout. A key question was whether or not the much discussed NNUE, easily updated neural network, technology (Cong, 2020) would make an appearance as part of a new STOCKFISH version. This would, after all, be a radical change to the architecture of the most successful TCEC Grand Champion of all. L2 L3 QL{ Fig. 1. The logos for the engines originally in the Qualification League and in Leagues 3 and 2. The platform for the ‘Shannon AB’ engines was as for TCEC18, courtesy of ‘noobpwnftw’, the major sponsor, four Intel (2016) Xeon E5-4669v4 processors: LINUX, 88 cores, 176 process threads and 128GiB of RAM with the sub-7-man Syzygy ‘EGT’ endgame tables in their own 1TB RAM. The TCEC GPU server was a 2.5GHz Intel Xeon Platinum 8163 CPU providing 32 threads, 48GiB of RAM and four Nvidia (2019) V100 GPUs. It is not clear how many CPU threads each NN-engine used. The ‘EGT’ platform was less than on the CPU side: 500 GB of SSD fronted by a 128GiB RAM buffer. 1 Corresponding author: [email protected] Table 1. The TCEC19 engines (CPW, 2020). -
Nieuwsbrief Schaakacademie Apeldoorn 93 – 7 Februari 2019
Nieuwsbrief Schaakacademie Apeldoorn 93 – 7 februari 2019 De nieuwsbrief bevat berichten over Schaakacademie Apeldoorn en divers schaaknieuws. Redactie: Karel van Delft. Nieuwsbrieven staan op www.schaakacademieapeldoorn.nl. Mail [email protected] voor contact, nieuwstips alsook aan- en afmelden voor de nieuwsbrief. IM Max Warmerdam (rechts) winnaar toptienkamp Tata. Naast hem IM Robby Kevlishvili en IM Thomas Beerdsen. Inhoud - 93e nieuwsbrief Schaakacademie Apeldoorn - Les- en trainingsaanbod Schaakacademie Apeldoorn - Schaakschool Het Bolwerk: onthouden met je lichaam - Schoolschaaklessen: proeflessen op diverse scholen - Apeldoornse scholencompetitie met IM’s Beerdsen en Van Delft als wedstrijdleider - Gratis download boekje ‘Ik leer schaken’ - ABKS organisatie verwacht 45 teams - Schaakles senioren in het Bolwerk: uitleg gameviewer Chessbase - Max Warmerdam wint toptienkamp Tata Steel Chess Tournament - Gratis publiciteit schaken - Scholen presenteren zich via site Jeugdschaak - Leela Chess Zero wint 2e TCEC Cup - Kunnen schakende computers ook leren? - Quote Isaac Newton: Een goede vraag is het halve antwoord - Divers nieuws - Trainingsmateriaal - Kalender en sites 93e nieuwsbrief Schaakacademie Apeldoorn Deze gratis nieuwsbrief bevat berichten over Schaakacademie Apeldoorn, Apeldoorns schaaknieuws en divers schaaknieuws. Nieuws van buiten Apeldoorn betreft vooral schaakeducatieve en psychologische onderwerpen. De nieuwsbrieven staan op www.schaakacademieapeldoorn.nl. Wie zich aanmeldt als abonnee (via [email protected]) krijgt mails met een link naar de meest recente nieuwsbrief. Diverse lezers leverden een bijdrage aan deze nieuwsbrief. Tips en bijdragen zijn welkom. Er zijn nu 340 e-mail abonnees en enkele duizenden contacten via social media. Een link staat in de Facebook groep Schaakpsychologie (513 leden) en op de FB pagina van Schaakacademie Apeldoorn. Ook delen clubs (Schaakstad Apeldoorn) en schakers de link naar de nieuwsbrieven op hun site en via social media. -
The TCEC20 Computer Chess Superfinal: a Perspective
The TCEC20 Computer Chess Superfinal: a Perspective GM Matthew Sadler1 London, UK 1 THE TCEC20 PREMIER DIVISION Just like last year, Season 20 DivP gathered a host of familiar faces and once again, one of those faces had a facelift! The venerable KOMODO engine had been given an NNUE beauty boost and there was a feeling that KOMODO DRAGON might prove a threat to LEELA’s and STOCKFISH’s customary tickets to the Superfinal. There was also an updated STOOFVLEES to enjoy while ETHEREAL came storming back to DivP after a convincing victory in League 1. ROFCHADE just pipped NNUE-powered IGEL on tie- break for the second DivP spot. In the end, KOMODO turned out to have indeed received a significant boost from NNUE, pipping ALLIESTEIN for third place. However, both LEELA and STOCKFISH seemed to have made another quantum leap forwards, dominating the field and ending joint first on 38/56, 5.5 points clear of KOMODO DRAGON! Both LEELA and STOCKFISH scored an astonishing 24 wins, with LEELA winning 24 of its 28 White games and STOCKFISH 22! Both winners lost 4 games, all as Black, with LEELA notably tripping up against bottom-marker ROFCHADE and STOCKFISH being beautifully squeezed by STOOFVLEES. The high winning percentage this time is explained by the new high-bias opening book designed for the Premier Division. I had slightly mixed feelings about it as LEELA and STOCKFISH winning virtually all their White games felt like going a bit too much the other way: you want them to have to work a bit harder for their Superfinal places! However, it was once again a very entertaining tournament with plenty of good games. -
Distributional Differences Between Human and Computer Play at Chess
Multidisciplinary Workshop on Advances in Preference Handling: Papers from the AAAI-14 Workshop Human and Computer Preferences at Chess Kenneth W. Regan Tamal Biswas Jason Zhou Department of CSE Department of CSE The Nichols School University at Buffalo University at Buffalo Buffalo, NY 14216 USA Amherst, NY 14260 USA Amherst, NY 14260 USA [email protected] [email protected] Abstract In our case the third parties are computer chess programs Distributional analysis of large data-sets of chess games analyzing the position and the played move, and the error played by humans and those played by computers shows the is the difference in analyzed value from its preferred move following differences in preferences and performance: when the two differ. We have run the computer analysis (1) The average error per move scales uniformly higher the to sufficient depth estimated to have strength at least equal more advantage is enjoyed by either side, with the effect to the top human players in our samples, depth significantly much sharper for humans than computers; greater than used in previous studies. We have replicated our (2) For almost any degree of advantage or disadvantage, a main human data set of 726,120 positions from tournaments human player has a significant 2–3% lower scoring expecta- played in 2010–2012 on each of four different programs: tion if it is his/her turn to move, than when the opponent is to Komodo 6, Stockfish DD (or 5), Houdini 4, and Rybka 3. move; the effect is nearly absent for computers. The first three finished 1-2-3 in the most recent Thoresen (3) Humans prefer to drive games into positions with fewer Chess Engine Competition, while Rybka 3 (to version 4.1) reasonable options and earlier resolutions, even when playing was the top program from 2008 to 2011. -
London Chess Classic, Round 2
PRESS RELEASE London Chess Classic, Round 2 WINTER DRAWS ON John Saunders reports: The second round of the 9th London Chess Classic saw the tournament migrate back to its familiar home at the Olympia Conference Centre, West London, after the brief dalliance with Google’s London HQ in Pancras Square. Round three takes place on Monday 4 December, but at the changed time of 16.00 London time. “We meet again, Mr Karjakin!” The 2016 world championship opponents renew their rivalry. (Photo John Saunders) As Maurice Ashley put it, quoting an earlier US sports commentator, "it was déjà vu all over again." First to finish were Magnus Carlsen and Sergey Karjakin who concluded hostilities on move 30. The first movement of the oeuvre was Giuoco Piano, the second pianissimo, the third molto doloroso and the fourth whatever the Italian is for non- existent. The score of this game may be examined on our website but is one for devoted chessologists only. I don't propose to do much more than hum the main theme. Contradicting what Emperor Joseph said in the film Amadeus, I felt there were not enough notes. Understandable, perhaps, that Carlsen and Karjakin should be sick of staring across the board at their opponent's coat of many sponsors’ colours. I'll confine myself to one second-hand comment: super-GM emeritus Jon Speelman, watching from the VIP Room, thought 21.f4 might have given White a little something. He was speaking without benefit of silicon, as he always does, but the engines agreed with him. The idea was to open up the e-file for White's rooks. -
Move Similarity Analysis in Chess Programs
Move similarity analysis in chess programs D. Dailey, A. Hair, M. Watkins Abstract In June 2011, the International Computer Games Association (ICGA) disqual- ified Vasik Rajlich and his Rybka chess program for plagiarism and breaking their rules on originality in their events from 2006-10. One primary basis for this came from a painstaking code comparison, using the source code of Fruit and the object code of Rybka, which found the selection of evaluation features in the programs to be almost the same, much more than expected by chance. In his brief defense, Rajlich indicated his opinion that move similarity testing was a superior method of detecting misappropriated entries. Later commentary by both Rajlich and his defenders reiterated the same, and indeed the ICGA Rules themselves specify move similarity as an example reason for why the tournament director would have warrant to request a source code examination. We report on data obtained from move-similarity testing. The principal dataset here consists of over 8000 positions and nearly 100 independent engines. We comment on such issues as: the robustness of the methods (upon modifying the experimental conditions), whether strong engines tend to play more similarly than weak ones, and the observed Fruit/Rybka move-similarity data. 1. History and background on derivative programs in computer chess Computer chess has seen a number of derivative programs over the years. One of the first was the incident in the 1989 World Microcomputer Chess Cham- pionship (WMCCC), in which Quickstep was disqualified due to the program being \a copy of the program Mephisto Almeria" in all important areas. -
Efficiently Mastering the Game of Nogo with Deep Reinforcement
electronics Article Efficiently Mastering the Game of NoGo with Deep Reinforcement Learning Supported by Domain Knowledge Yifan Gao 1,*,† and Lezhou Wu 2,† 1 College of Medicine and Biological Information Engineering, Northeastern University, Liaoning 110819, China 2 College of Information Science and Engineering, Northeastern University, Liaoning 110819, China; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected] † These authors contributed equally to this work. Abstract: Computer games have been regarded as an important field of artificial intelligence (AI) for a long time. The AlphaZero structure has been successful in the game of Go, beating the top professional human players and becoming the baseline method in computer games. However, the AlphaZero training process requires tremendous computing resources, imposing additional difficulties for the AlphaZero-based AI. In this paper, we propose NoGoZero+ to improve the AlphaZero process and apply it to a game similar to Go, NoGo. NoGoZero+ employs several innovative features to improve training speed and performance, and most improvement strategies can be transferred to other nonspecific areas. This paper compares it with the original AlphaZero process, and results show that NoGoZero+ increases the training speed to about six times that of the original AlphaZero process. Moreover, in the experiment, our agent beat the original AlphaZero agent with a score of 81:19 after only being trained by 20,000 self-play games’ data (small in quantity compared with Citation: Gao, Y.; Wu, L. Efficiently 120,000 self-play games’ data consumed by the original AlphaZero). The NoGo game program based Mastering the Game of NoGo with on NoGoZero+ was the runner-up in the 2020 China Computer Game Championship (CCGC) with Deep Reinforcement Learning limited resources, defeating many AlphaZero-based programs. -
Qualifiers for the British Championship 2020 (Last Updated 14Th November 2019)
Qualifiers for the British Championship 2020 (last updated 14th November 2019) Section A: Qualification from the British Championship A1. British Champions Jacob Aagaard (B1), Michael Adams (A3, B1, C), Leonard Barden (B3), Robert Bellin (B3), George Botterill (B3), Stuart Conquest (B1), Joseph Gallagher (B1), William Hartston (B3), Jonathan Hawkins (A3, B1), Michael Hennigan (B3), Julian Hodgson (B1), David Howell (A3, B1), Gawain Jones (A3, B1), Raymond Keene (B1), Peter Lee, Paul Littlewood (B3), Jonathan Mestel (B1), John Nunn (B1), Jonathan Penrose (B1), James Plaskett (B1), Jonathan Rowson (B1), Matthew Sadler (B1), Nigel Short (B1), Jon Speelman (B1), Chris Ward (A3, B1), William Watson (B1), A2. British Women’s Champions Ketevan Arakhamia-Grant (B1, B2), Jana Bellin (B2), Melanie Buckley, Margaret Clarke, Joan Doulton, Amy Hoare, Jovanka Houska (A3, B2, B3), Harriet Hunt (B2, B3), Sheila Jackson (B2), Akshaya Kalaiyalahan, Susan Lalic (B2, B3), Sarah Longson, Helen Milligan, Gillian Moore, Dinah Norman, Jane Richmond (B6), Cathy Forbes (B4), A3. Top 20 players and ties in the 2018 British Championship Luke McShane (C), Nicholas Pert (B1), Daniel Gormally (B1), Daniel Fernandez (B1), Keith Arkell (A8, B1), David Eggleston (B3), Tamas Fodor (B1), Justin Hy Tan (A5), Peter K Wells (B1), Richard JD Palliser (B3), Lawrence Trent (B3), Joseph McPhillips (A5, B3), Peter T Roberson (B3), James R Adair (B3), Mark L Hebden (B1), Paul Macklin (B5), David Zakarian (B5), Koby Kalavannan (A6), Craig Pritchett (B5) A4. Top 10 players and ties in the 2018 Major Open Thomas Villiers, Viktor Stoyanov, Andrew P Smith, Jonah B Willow, Ben Ogunshola, John G Cooper, Federico Rocco (A7), Robert Stanley, Callum D Brewer, Jacob D Yoon, Jagdish Modi Shyam, Aron Teh Eu Wen, Maciej Janiszewski A5.