Welcome to Chess2U - The Ultimate Computer Chess Forum!
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post and use all thefeatures of the Chess2U forums. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
Go to page : 1, 2, 3 
Message [Page 1 of 3]
I think there are two teams now and they run two separated projects, Deep Saros (free) and Vitruvius (commercial).
________________
Ch355 2 u m3mb3r WALDEMAR...g00d g4m3 f0r 4ll...y4h000000!
XsupremeX wrote:I think there are two teams now and they run two separated projects, Deep Saros (free) and Vitruvius (commercial).
two teams?! No, Deep Saros "Experimental Mouse"
There is NO functional change. Deep Saros 3.0 is released to show a different style of play and that is all. 
Version 3.0 is inspired by Wilhelm Steinitz. The evaluation functions have been modified to follow the rules dictated by Steinitz in the following publications:
- The Modern Chess Instructor (1889)
- Various numbers of "International Chess Magazine" (1886, 1901)
The value of pieces and pawns, is the one recommended by Steinitz.
It seems to me that here you are making a fundamental mistake (speaking generally). DeepSaros is a fork of Ivanhoe, in which I have begun to follow a different path from that of the original program. This does not mean that DeepSaros it is better of Ivanhoe (or even worse), but only a bit different.
The changes that I mentioned, relate to different parts of the code that performs the evaluation of moves, both for pieces and for pawns. There is not, of course, a radical change, but I wanted the engine follow the rules of the old school of Steinitz. This makes it stronger? I do not know, mine is just experimenting ... And fun!
The engine is free, and I said, without mincing words, its origin. For this reason I do not understand why Velmarin is so angry. If DeepSaros able to do some nice playing, I'm happy and excited. When I published the results, the aim was not to say: "DeepSaros is stronger than Ivanhoe," my goal was just to say: "I'm happy, DeepSaros can play well, even against a powerful engine such as Ivanhoe! ".
It's different.
Carotino.
The changes that I mentioned, relate to different parts of the code that performs the evaluation of moves, both for pieces and for pawns. There is not, of course, a radical change, but I wanted the engine follow the rules of the old school of Steinitz. This makes it stronger? I do not know, mine is just experimenting ... And fun!
The engine is free, and I said, without mincing words, its origin. For this reason I do not understand why Velmarin is so angry. If DeepSaros able to do some nice playing, I'm happy and excited. When I published the results, the aim was not to say: "DeepSaros is stronger than Ivanhoe," my goal was just to say: "I'm happy, DeepSaros can play well, even against a powerful engine such as Ivanhoe! ".
It's different.
Carotino.
And how to put a fictitious example DeepSaros test faced a Mod of Ivanhoe, prepared by server
where supposedly DeepSaros won by a landslide ,
where Mod ready for me not achieved a single victory.
You always support the project DeepSaros, but came back commercial.
DeepSaros continues, it's pretty innovative.
But please, real test.
greetings.
where supposedly DeepSaros won by a landslide ,
where Mod ready for me not achieved a single victory.
You always support the project DeepSaros, but came back commercial.
DeepSaros continues, it's pretty innovative.
But please, real test.
greetings.
From Immortalchess:
This discussion encourage me to do a test:
Deep Saros 3 64x +9=31-10
IvanHoe.VE.fa 64x +10=31-9
Win7 Ultimate sp1 & Intel Core i3 with 4 Thread
Aquarium 2011
Perfect 2012 till 10 move
Ponder Off
Hash 750 mg
15'+3" 50 games
No More discription!
http://www.mediafire.com/?qhc31u1qgza4x8q
This discussion encourage me to do a test:
Deep Saros 3 64x +9=31-10
IvanHoe.VE.fa 64x +10=31-9
Win7 Ultimate sp1 & Intel Core i3 with 4 Thread
Aquarium 2011
Perfect 2012 till 10 move
Ponder Off
Hash 750 mg
15'+3" 50 games
No More discription!
http://www.mediafire.com/?qhc31u1qgza4x8q
GrahamB wrote:ELITE 4CPU
Xeon X5430x2 Octal
ChessGUI
256mb hash each
3-4-5 piece tablebases
Ponder off
ICCFMasters2011.cgb book
40 moves in 29 minutes repeating (adapted for the CCRL)
All engines 64-bit where available
2 cycles 30 rounds
Participants
Houdini 2.0c 64-bit 4CPU
Rybka 4.1 64-bit 4CPU
Critter 1.4 64-bit 4CPU
Stockfish 2.2.2 64-bit 4CPU
Strelka 5.1 64-bit
Ivanhoe 9.46h 64-bit 4CPU
Vitruvius 1.11C 64-bit 4CPU
Deep Saros 3.0 64-bit 4CPU
Komodo 4 64-bit
Naum 4.2 64-bit 4CPU
Chiron 1.1a 64-bit 4CPU
Spike 1.4 Leiden 4CPU
Deep Junior 13 64-bit 4CPU
Hiarcs 13.2 4CPU
Protector 1.4.0 64-bit 4CPU
Spark 1.0 64-bit 4CPU
http://www.chess2u.com/t5751-elite-4cpu-live-broadcast
There is a bug in Deep Saros 3.0 (Reported by Graham)
http://www.chess2u.com/t5751-elite-4cpu-live-broadcast#33018Deep Saros wanted to use up to 75% of the 8 cores when I had it set to 4CPU. I had to put it on 3CPU because I'm running another GUI with 4CPU testing on that computer and it was going to interfere with other engines.
Message [Page 1 of 3]
Go to page : 1, 2, 3
Related Topics
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum