Check out Janggi (Korean Chess), our featured variant for December, 2024.


[ Help | Earliest Comments | Latest Comments ]
[ List All Subjects of Discussion | Create New Subject of Discussion ]
[ List Earliest Comments Only For Pages | Games | Rated Pages | Rated Games | Subjects of Discussion ]

Single Comment

Ludii PortalA website . The home of Ludii, a general game system that can play the full range of traditional strategy games, including chess variants. () [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]
🕸Fergus Duniho wrote on Mon, Mar 20, 2023 02:06 AM UTC:

Since the Ludii Player has many engines (or agents) to choose from, I had it do an analysis to find the best player for Chess. The analysis was quick, and it said "Best predicted agent is AlphaBeta". But I already found that it played poorly against Ludii. In case more thinking time would eventually give Alpha-Beta an edge, I increased the thinking time to 5 seconds for another game between Ludii as White and Alpha-Beta as Black. Ludii won this game with checkmate. During the game, it showed an analysis of each engine, and Ludii, identified here as UBFM consistently had a higher search depth than Alpha-Beta.

UBFM (player 1) completed an analysis that reached at some point a depth of 4:
best value observed at root 0.13999999,
1196 different states were evaluated
50 iterations, with 134 calls of minimax
Alpha-Beta (player 2) completed search of depth 2.
UBFM (player 1) completed an analysis that reached at some point a depth of 3:
best value observed at root 0.20000005,
909 different states were evaluated
30 iterations, with 68 calls of minimax
Alpha-Beta (player 2) completed search of depth 1.
UBFM (player 1) completed an analysis that reached at some point a depth of 4:
best value observed at root 0.54125,
1014 different states were evaluated
33 iterations, with 97 calls of minimax
Alpha-Beta (player 2) completed search of depth 2.
UBFM (player 1) completed an analysis that reached at some point a depth of 3:
best value observed at root 0.6924999,
1002 different states were evaluated
28 iterations, with 75 calls of minimax
Alpha-Beta (player 2) completed search of depth 1.
UBFM (player 1) completed an analysis that reached at some point a depth of 6:
best value observed at root 1.2237501,
837 different states were evaluated
32 iterations, with 110 calls of minimax
Alpha-Beta (player 2) completed search of depth 2.
UBFM (player 1) completed an analysis that reached at some point a depth of 4:
best value observed at root 0.7437501,
878 different states were evaluated
37 iterations, with 114 calls of minimax
Alpha-Beta (player 2) completed search of depth 2.
UBFM (player 1) completed an analysis that reached at some point a depth of 3:
best value observed at root 0.66375005,
881 different states were evaluated
36 iterations, with 72 calls of minimax
Alpha-Beta (player 2) completed search of depth 2.
UBFM (player 1) completed an analysis that reached at some point a depth of 4:
best value observed at root 0.7237501,
883 different states were evaluated
35 iterations, with 101 calls of minimax
Alpha-Beta (player 2) completed search of depth 2.
UBFM (player 1) completed an analysis that reached at some point a depth of 2:
best value observed at root 0.6237501,
894 different states were evaluated
33 iterations, with 65 calls of minimax
Alpha-Beta (player 2) completed search of depth 1.
UBFM (player 1) completed an analysis that reached at some point a depth of 4:
best value observed at root 0.9375,
908 different states were evaluated
24 iterations, with 65 calls of minimax
Alpha-Beta (player 2) completed search of depth 1.
UBFM (player 1) completed an analysis that reached at some point a depth of 3:
best value observed at root 0.9112501,
918 different states were evaluated
25 iterations, with 63 calls of minimax
Alpha-Beta (player 2) completed search of depth 2.
UBFM (player 1) completed an analysis that reached at some point a depth of 3:
best value observed at root 0.9512501,
1025 different states were evaluated
39 iterations, with 80 calls of minimax
Alpha-Beta (player 2) completed search of depth 2.
UBFM (player 1) completed an analysis that reached at some point a depth of 3:
best value observed at root 0.77125,
900 different states were evaluated
35 iterations, with 71 calls of minimax
Alpha-Beta (player 2) completed search of depth 2.
UBFM (player 1) completed an analysis that reached at some point a depth of 2:
best value observed at root 0.9112501,
909 different states were evaluated
34 iterations, with 67 calls of minimax
Alpha-Beta (player 2) completed search of depth 2.
UBFM (player 1) completed an analysis that reached at some point a depth of 3:
best value observed at root 0.73125005,
912 different states were evaluated
34 iterations, with 69 calls of minimax
Alpha-Beta (player 2) completed search of depth 2.
UBFM (player 1) completed an analysis that reached at some point a depth of 2:
best value observed at root 0.6712501,
794 different states were evaluated
22 iterations, with 43 calls of minimax
Alpha-Beta (player 2) completed search of depth 1.
UBFM (player 1) completed an analysis that reached at some point a depth of 3:
best value observed at root 0.68000007,
803 different states were evaluated
20 iterations, with 55 calls of minimax
Alpha-Beta (player 2) completed search of depth 2.
UBFM (player 1) completed an analysis that reached at some point a depth of 3:
best value observed at root 0.6575,
875 different states were evaluated
23 iterations, with 50 calls of minimax
Alpha-Beta (player 2) completed search of depth 2.
UBFM (player 1) completed an analysis that reached at some point a depth of 4:
best value observed at root 0.87125003,
920 different states were evaluated
22 iterations, with 60 calls of minimax
Alpha-Beta (player 2) completed search of depth 2.
UBFM (player 1) completed an analysis that reached at some point a depth of 3:
best value observed at root 0.90250015,
1043 different states were evaluated
26 iterations, with 70 calls of minimax
Alpha-Beta (player 2) completed search of depth 2.
UBFM (player 1) completed an analysis that reached at some point a depth of 4:
best value observed at root 1.15625,
1223 different states were evaluated
32 iterations, with 98 calls of minimax
Alpha-Beta (player 2) completed search of depth 2.
UBFM (player 1) completed an analysis that reached at some point a depth of 3:
best value observed at root 0.8962499,
1111 different states were evaluated
44 iterations, with 88 calls of minimax
Alpha-Beta (player 2) completed search of depth 2.
UBFM (player 1) completed an analysis that reached at some point a depth of 3:
best value observed at root 0.9849999,
1272 different states were evaluated
51 iterations, with 108 calls of minimax
Alpha-Beta (player 2) completed search of depth 2.
UBFM (player 1) completed an analysis that reached at some point a depth of 3:
best value observed at root 1.2962499,
1107 different states were evaluated
26 iterations, with 66 calls of minimax
Alpha-Beta (player 2) completed search of depth 1.
UBFM (player 1) completed an analysis that reached at some point a depth of 3:
best value observed at root 1.0362499,
1006 different states were evaluated
32 iterations, with 65 calls of minimax
Alpha-Beta (player 2) completed search of depth 1.
UBFM (player 1) completed an analysis that reached at some point a depth of 4:
best value observed at root 1.7525,
1297 different states were evaluated
35 iterations, with 100 calls of minimax
Alpha-Beta (player 2) completed search of depth 2.
UBFM (player 1) completed an analysis that reached at some point a depth of 5:
best value observed at root 1.6012498,
1267 different states were evaluated
49 iterations, with 187 calls of minimax
Alpha-Beta (player 2) completed search of depth 3.
UBFM (player 1) completed an analysis that reached at some point a depth of 3:
best value observed at root 1.68125,
1304 different states were evaluated
41 iterations, with 99 calls of minimax
Alpha-Beta (player 2) completed search of depth 3.
UBFM (player 1) completed an analysis that reached at some point a depth of 9:
best value observed at root 1.6675,
1278 different states were evaluated
101 iterations, with 398 calls of minimax
Alpha-Beta (player 2) completed search of depth 3.
UBFM (player 1) completed an analysis that reached at some point a depth of 7:
best value observed at root 1.5674999,
1288 different states were evaluated
107 iterations, with 429 calls of minimax
Alpha-Beta (player 2) completed search of depth 3.
UBFM (player 1) completed an analysis that reached at some point a depth of 5:
best value observed at root 1000000.0,
954 different states were evaluated
323 iterations, with 1225 calls of minimax
Alpha-Beta (player 2) completed search of depth 0.
UBFM (player 1) completed an analysis that reached at some point a depth of 4:
best value observed at root 1000000.0,
1237 different states were evaluated
753 iterations, with 1541 calls of minimax

Here is the game:

  1. (Move E2-E4)
  2. (Move E7-E5)
  3. (Move D1-H5)
  4. (Move D8-H4)
  5. (Remove H4)
  6. (Move G7-G5)
  7. (Remove G5)
  8. (Move D7-D5)
  9. (Move F1-B5)
  10. (Move C7-C6)
  11. (Remove E5)
  12. (Move E8-D8)
  13. (Move E5-G5)
  14. (Move D8-C7)
  15. (Move G5-E5)
  16. (Move C7-B6)
  17. (Move B5-E2)
  18. (Move C8-G4)
  19. (Remove G4)
  20. (Move B8-D7)
  21. (Remove D7)
  22. (Move B6-A6)
  23. (Move G1-E2)
  24. (Move F8-B4)
  25. (Move B2-B3)
  26. (Move F7-F5)
  27. (Move A2-A3)
  28. (Move B4-C5)
  29. (Move A1-A2)
  30. (Move G8-F6)
  31. (Move C1-B2)
  32. (Remove F2)
  33. (Move E1-D1)
  34. (Remove D7)
  35. (Remove F5)
  36. (Move H8-G8)
  37. (Remove F2)
  38. (Move D5-D4)
  39. (Remove D4)
  40. (Move D7-C5)
  41. (Remove C5)
  42. (Move A8-D8)
  43. (Move B3-B4)
  44. (Move B7-B5)
  45. (Move D1-C1)
  46. (Move D8-D7)
  47. (Move F2-F6)
  48. (Move A6-B7)
  49. (Move H1-D1)
  50. (Move D7-D4)
  51. (Remove D4)
  52. (Remove G2)
  53. (Move F6-F7)
  54. (Move B7-C8)
  55. (Move D1-F1)
  56. (Remove E2)
  57. (Move F7-G8)
  58. (Move C8-D7)
  59. (Move F1-F7)
  60. (Move D7-D6)
  61. (Move G8-D8)
  62. (Move D6-E6)
  63. (Move F7-F6)