- Playing Strength
As mentioned in the preface of this book, writing a chess engine can be a rewarding endavour. It takes a long time to write a very strong engine, especially if you are just starting out. It takes some knowledge about programming and chess, lots of time, and often, perseverance, to get the first basic version up and running. After this version works and plays legal and somewhat decent chess, it can be improved incrementally. If done correctly, each new feature will add playing strength.
This is no different with Rustic. The first version, Alpha 1, is the baseline version. It only has the minimal amount of features to play legal, but decent chess:
- The board representation (Bitboards)
- Move generator (Fancy Magic Bitboards)
- Make/Unmake move on the board
- Alpha-Beta search
- Quiescence search
- Check extension
- MVV-LVA move sorting
- Evaluation (Material counting and PST's)
- UCI communication protocol
All other versions build on top of the previous version. The table below provides an overview of the added features per version and the gain in playing strength they provide. The strength gain is measured by playing the new Rustic version against the previous version. Please note that the results obtained in my tests will be different from other engines: adding the features in a different order, will give different results.
Also take into account that results by self-play are inflated. Because one engine has a feature the other doesn't have, with that feature being the only difference, the newer engine will (ab)use this feature constantly. In the end the real increase in playing strength can only be measured in large tournaments. Self-play is used to prove that the newer engine is stronger than the previous version, not to obtain a rating.
In the table below, we start with the baseline version. The feature "TT cuts only" was built on top of Alpha 1. The rating increase in self-play against Alpha 1 was +50 Elo. Then the "TT Move Ordering" feature was built on top of the "TT Cuts Only" version, and this gained +100 Elo in self-play. This version became Alpha 2, which was tested in the CCRL list at 1815 Elo.
|Alpha 1||Baseline version||---||1675|
|TT cuts only||42|
|TT Move sorting||103|
It is impossible to define the strength of a chess engine, or a human player for that matter, by an exact number. This is because of how the Elo-rating system works. The rating system works with a pool of players, and it determines their relative strength, from one player to another. Not every player can play every opening or time control equally well. It also happens that a certain player A consistently performs better against B than expected, but also consistently plays worse than expected against player C.
If you test engines in your own gauntlets, it is therefore impossible to compare the results of your gauntlet against something like the CCRL rating list. The time control is different (and even if it's exactly the same, your computer is different), the opening books are different, and you are likely choosing different opponents. Your pool of engines to test is also smaller. All these factors will cause your gauntlet to have different ratings for each engine, including your own. The only thing you can use your gauntlet for is to determine if "new engine" is stronger than "old engine", if they play the same opponents, under the same time controls, with the same opening book, on the same computer.