World Draughts Forum

Is there any news about initiatives for creating rating lists for international draughts engines?

Do I understand correctly Damage 15.3 is based on some kind of Machine Learning but not based on a neural network approach as is used for Lc0 in chess?

jj wrote: ↑

Sat Apr 11, 2020 13:29

We have the same confusion as last year.

Thanks for clarifying. So then with 5 minutes for more than 60 moves it certainly is in the Blitz range definition.

With the tournaments of Krzysztof Grzelak from 2017 onwards I noticed from year to year different hardware and different time controls. This too makes it difficult to make comparisons ratingwise. I guess only with an initiative to create CIDRL (Computer International Draughts Rating Lists) with fixe...

I was wondering about "Rapid" since the time control seems more in line with the definition of "Blitz" of the FMJD . From there on page 60 of the Annexes : Annex 6 Rapid and blitz games 1. Definition A game is considered accelerated when the time that is allowed for each player for the whole game is...

Thanks Fabien for this clarification. A jump of about 100 elo from Scan 2.0 would be huge. This would put the current best ID programs playing on modest hardware very probably indeed beyond worldchampionship level. As in chess matches or tournaments with machines playing with worldtop human players ...

Well, maybe I can't expect a quick and easy answer. And besides : the world chess community is much larger than the worlds draughts community. On the rating list of the FIDE are about 360,000 players and on the rating list of the FMJD are about 2,200 players (men and women included). That's quite a ...

Are there any renowned computer draughts ELO rating lists of hardware/software combinations playing draughts according to the rules of FMJD like there are CCRL ELO rating lists for hardware/software combinations playing chess according to the rules of FIDE ? If existing it also would be interesting ...

Meanwhile I'm wondering if anyone else has any new information about the estimated playing strength performance of the current best draught programs on high-end amateur hardware. Is this beyond worldchampion-level yet?

According to this post of BertTuyt the rating difference between Scan 2.0 and Kingsrow 1.56 can be calculated as follows : 400 * log10 (0.56 / 0.44) ≈ 42 So assuming Kingsrow 1.56 is stronger than Kingsrow 1.52 the rating of Scan 2.0 on the same hardware where Maximus played on should be at least 24...

On this forum posted by Ed Gilbert, author of Kingsrow, were the results of a match between Scan 2.0 and Kingsrow 1.56 of 988 games. The score was about 56% for Scan 2.0.

In the document Schwarzman versus Maximus of Jan-Jaap van Horssen is on page 15 the estimated rating of Maximus 2350 on the basis of the described matchresults. This is probably with a large error margin since the match consisted of only 6 games. On page 7 and page 8 the used hardware for Maximus is...