Code: Select all
01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10
Houdini 1.02 95 88 87 85 87 88 86 81 82 90 869
IvanHoe 57a 96 86 89 89 91 87 86 71 81 94 870Code: Select all
001 002 003 004 005 006 007 008 009 010
Houdini 1.02 969 861 929 905 926 933 933 890 887 933 9166
IvanHoe 57a 971 845 928 930 952 958 909 809 866 963 9111I don't have that data. I was wondering if making available all the log files of top engines like Stockfish, Houdini, Ivanhoe, Komodo, Spark etc could help in isolating the tough puzzles from the moderate/easy ones?BB+ wrote:Is there an easy way I can get a chart of the "hardest" positions in STS, that is, those (of the 1000) that have the lowest percentage of engines that get the correct move? I suppose this is just some transposing of the available data, but I can't find anything that directly gives this on the STS website.
Thank you very much, Swaminathan, for the great results. That's the most comfortable way of using your suite for all of us of course, if you do it for us.Swaminathan wrote:Based on the stats, I can't really say which one is better. It's still open to research and learning.
Another way of making comparison is Ivanhoe leads 5.5 - 4.5 over Houdini in 10 STS's but Houdini has more better grades.
I think STS 8 is not nearly as crucial or important relative to others but it still helps for a top program.
Peter wrote:Thank you very much, Swaminathan, for the great results. That's the most comfortable way of using your suite for all of us of course, if you do it for us.Swaminathan wrote:Based on the stats, I can't really say which one is better. It's still open to research and learning.
Another way of making comparison is Ivanhoe leads 5.5 - 4.5 over Houdini in 10 STS's but Houdini has more better grades.
I think STS 8 is not nearly as crucial or important relative to others but it still helps for a top program.
I will allow myself to set a link to your posting in CSS forum, won't I, if you don't mind.
Best