Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1   Report Post  
Old March 16th 04, 06:05 AM
Grant
 
Posts: n/a
Default Shredder 8 bug?

There have been reports here that Shredder 8 has some serious bugs,
especially when analyzing games.

Is this true? Someone here suggested that the software plays
"give-away chess" and that the analyses it produces are often, but not
always, junk. (My "give-away chess" skills need no improvement!)
  #2   Report Post  
Old March 16th 04, 12:08 PM
HD
 
Posts: n/a
Default Shredder 8 bug?

Grant skrev:
There have been reports here that Shredder 8 has some serious bugs,
especially when analyzing games.

Is this true? Someone here suggested that the software plays
"give-away chess" and that the analyses it produces are often, but not
always, junk. (My "give-away chess" skills need no improvement!)



This happens from time to time with the Shredder engines (7-8), and is
probably mostly related to the strong pruning, so when the engine
"spells" a variation it sometimes provides some garbage.
This is when using "infinite analysis" and "blunder-check". However, if
you use "full analysis" or DPA (Deep Positional Analysis) there
shouldn't be any problems, since the moves are checked again before they
are put into a line.
But again, if you use Blunder-check, you can unsellect the full
variation, so the program only gives the first (alternative?) move.

In other words: The problem appear if the engine gives a full variation,
while the first move can be relied on.

HD

  #3   Report Post  
Old March 16th 04, 02:55 PM
Euclid
 
Posts: n/a
Default Shredder 8 bug?

Yes, it's true. Only the first move is reliable. And that isn't likely to
change, because reportedly the author likes it that way. He calls it a
"feature"!? It would slow down the engine to modify it to provide accurate
analysis, which isn't his objective. Being #1 on the SSDF list probably
sells more CDs. So if you need reliable analysis get something else, not
Shredder 7/8. But if you just want to find the best move in a position, it
looks like Shredder 7/8 is top dog. Some would disagree of course, and I'm
not absolutely sure myself. There might be engines that would find better
moves in infinite analysis mode run for long times (1 hour or more), but
that's difficult to test or prove.
-E

"Grant" wrote in message
...
There have been reports here that Shredder 8 has some serious bugs,
especially when analyzing games.

Is this true? Someone here suggested that the software plays
"give-away chess" and that the analyses it produces are often, but not
always, junk. (My "give-away chess" skills need no improvement!)


  #4   Report Post  
Old March 16th 04, 03:03 PM
none
 
Posts: n/a
Default Shredder 8 bug?

Euclid wrote:
Yes, it's true. Only the first move is reliable. And that isn't likely to
change, because reportedly the author likes it that way. He calls it a
"feature"!? It would slow down the engine to modify it to provide accurate
analysis, which isn't his objective. Being #1 on the SSDF list probably
sells more CDs. So if you need reliable analysis get something else, not
Shredder 7/8. But if you just want to find the best move in a position, it
looks like Shredder 7/8 is top dog. Some would disagree of course, and I'm
not absolutely sure myself. There might be engines that would find better
moves in infinite analysis mode run for long times (1 hour or more), but
that's difficult to test or prove.
-E

"Grant" wrote in message
...
There have been reports here that Shredder 8 has some serious bugs,
especially when analyzing games.

Is this true? Someone here suggested that the software plays
"give-away chess" and that the analyses it produces are often, but not
always, junk. (My "give-away chess" skills need no improvement!)


I haven't seen anyone but you making this assertion Euclid. In fact when
I search on google it shows up posts made by you claiming the same
thing. I own, and use, both Fritz 8 and Shredder 8, and find that the
quality of analysis they give is the same. I have yet to see any garbage
analysis out of Shredder of the kind you claim.
  #5   Report Post  
Old March 16th 04, 04:15 PM
HD
 
Posts: n/a
Default Shredder 8 bug?



I haven't seen anyone but you making this assertion Euclid. In fact when
I search on google it shows up posts made by you claiming the same
thing. I own, and use, both Fritz 8 and Shredder 8, and find that the
quality of analysis they give is the same. I have yet to see any garbage
analysis out of Shredder of the kind you claim.


Unfortunately I've it seen too. It's not a joke to me, since I've been
running through the single-line analysis of different engines with
different engines. What you might discover if you go over a line of
analysis from Shredder (copy to notationpane), is that the evaluation
provided by the engine is (extremely) wrong. I the evaluation from the
line you've copied says ie. 1.54, then you may experience it to end at,
say, 10.90 - or maybe -15.02, when you're stepping through it manually.
And that can be discovered with either Shredder itself or any other
engine. However, it's not unlikely that you have try over a period of
time - keeping an eye on it - because it's not a rule.
Another to see it, ofcause is to look at a lot of analysed posistions
and judge for yourself. Personally I don't have any doubts any longer.

HD



  #6   Report Post  
Old March 17th 04, 03:50 AM
Euclid
 
Posts: n/a
Default Shredder 8 bug?

"HD" wrote in message
. dk...


I haven't seen anyone but you making this assertion Euclid. In fact when
I search on google it shows up posts made by you claiming the same
thing. I own, and use, both Fritz 8 and Shredder 8, and find that the
quality of analysis they give is the same. I have yet to see any garbage
analysis out of Shredder of the kind you claim.


Unfortunately I've it seen too. It's not a joke to me, since I've been
running through the single-line analysis of different engines with
different engines. What you might discover if you go over a line of
analysis from Shredder (copy to notationpane), is that the evaluation
provided by the engine is (extremely) wrong. I the evaluation from the
line you've copied says ie. 1.54, then you may experience it to end at,
say, 10.90 - or maybe -15.02, when you're stepping through it manually.
And that can be discovered with either Shredder itself or any other
engine. However, it's not unlikely that you have try over a period of
time - keeping an eye on it - because it's not a rule.
Another to see it, ofcause is to look at a lot of analysed posistions
and judge for yourself. Personally I don't have any doubts any longer.

HD
____________

"none" must not be using the right searchstring on google. Just searching
for my posts will only find my posts. You would have to use a more general
searchstring to find other people's posts, and that might not be easy to do.
The Shredder 7/8 analysis bug isn't debatable. It has been documented by
various people on CCC and elsewhere. It is now taken for common knowledge. A
few will still try to debate it, but they're wrong.
-E


  #7   Report Post  
Old March 17th 04, 07:19 AM
none
 
Posts: n/a
Default Shredder 8 bug?

Euclid wrote:
"HD" wrote in message
. dk...


I haven't seen anyone but you making this assertion Euclid. In fact when
I search on google it shows up posts made by you claiming the same
thing. I own, and use, both Fritz 8 and Shredder 8, and find that the
quality of analysis they give is the same. I have yet to see any garbage
analysis out of Shredder of the kind you claim.



Unfortunately I've it seen too. It's not a joke to me, since I've been
running through the single-line analysis of different engines with
different engines. What you might discover if you go over a line of
analysis from Shredder (copy to notationpane), is that the evaluation
provided by the engine is (extremely) wrong. I the evaluation from the
line you've copied says ie. 1.54, then you may experience it to end at,
say, 10.90 - or maybe -15.02, when you're stepping through it manually.
And that can be discovered with either Shredder itself or any other
engine. However, it's not unlikely that you have try over a period of
time - keeping an eye on it - because it's not a rule.
Another to see it, ofcause is to look at a lot of analysed posistions
and judge for yourself. Personally I don't have any doubts any longer.

HD
____________

"none" must not be using the right searchstring on google. Just searching
for my posts will only find my posts. You would have to use a more general
searchstring to find other people's posts, and that might not be easy to do.
The Shredder 7/8 analysis bug isn't debatable. It has been documented by
various people on CCC and elsewhere. It is now taken for common knowledge. A
few will still try to debate it, but they're wrong.
-E


Yeah it isn't easy to do, because it simply isn't there.

Shredder 7 chess analysis and Shredder 7 chess analysis problems, turns
up nothing.

Shredder 7 chess bug - turns up problems people have with illegal
warezed copies of Shredder 8. You turn up with some warez advice in this
thread.
The Shredder 7 analysis bug chess - turns up posts by you claiming it's
buggy, even though you don't own a copy.
Shredder704.eng analysis is nonsense - turns up posts by you claiming
its buggy. An actual chess programmer Gian-Carlo Pascutto (author of
Deep Sjeng) tries to explain to you in this thread how you are wrong.
You seem to ignore it.

So you can see how someone seeing only your name attached to these
assertions would easily come to the conclusion that you
a) Don't own a copy of Shredder, since you admitted as much in one of
the above threads.
b) Ignore insight giving to you by a professional chess programmer,
while not invalidating your assertions, makes them look weak.
c) Fail to understand how a chess engine works. It would be impossible
for a chess engine to be as strong as shredder, and produce the garbage
analysis that you claim it does.

As an aside, a search on shredder creator Stefan Meyer–Kahlen turns up
no mention of your claim that his engine produces crappy analysis as a
feature.



  #8   Report Post  
Old March 17th 04, 03:07 PM
Euclid
 
Posts: n/a
Default Shredder 8 bug?


"none" wrote in message
. cable.rogers.com...
Euclid wrote:
"HD" wrote in message
. dk...


I haven't seen anyone but you making this assertion Euclid. In fact when
I search on google it shows up posts made by you claiming the same
thing. I own, and use, both Fritz 8 and Shredder 8, and find that the
quality of analysis they give is the same. I have yet to see any garbage
analysis out of Shredder of the kind you claim.



Unfortunately I've it seen too. It's not a joke to me, since I've been
running through the single-line analysis of different engines with
different engines. What you might discover if you go over a line of
analysis from Shredder (copy to notationpane), is that the evaluation
provided by the engine is (extremely) wrong. I the evaluation from the
line you've copied says ie. 1.54, then you may experience it to end at,
say, 10.90 - or maybe -15.02, when you're stepping through it manually.
And that can be discovered with either Shredder itself or any other
engine. However, it's not unlikely that you have try over a period of
time - keeping an eye on it - because it's not a rule.
Another to see it, ofcause is to look at a lot of analysed posistions
and judge for yourself. Personally I don't have any doubts any longer.

HD
____________

"none" must not be using the right searchstring on google. Just searching
for my posts will only find my posts. You would have to use a more general
searchstring to find other people's posts, and that might not be easy to

do.
The Shredder 7/8 analysis bug isn't debatable. It has been documented by
various people on CCC and elsewhere. It is now taken for common knowledge.

A
few will still try to debate it, but they're wrong.
-E


Yeah it isn't easy to do, because it simply isn't there.

Shredder 7 chess analysis and Shredder 7 chess analysis problems, turns
up nothing.

Shredder 7 chess bug - turns up problems people have with illegal
warezed copies of Shredder 8. You turn up with some warez advice in this
thread.
The Shredder 7 analysis bug chess - turns up posts by you claiming it's
buggy, even though you don't own a copy.
Shredder704.eng analysis is nonsense - turns up posts by you claiming
its buggy. An actual chess programmer Gian-Carlo Pascutto (author of
Deep Sjeng) tries to explain to you in this thread how you are wrong.
You seem to ignore it.

So you can see how someone seeing only your name attached to these
assertions would easily come to the conclusion that you
a) Don't own a copy of Shredder, since you admitted as much in one of
the above threads.
b) Ignore insight giving to you by a professional chess programmer,
while not invalidating your assertions, makes them look weak.
c) Fail to understand how a chess engine works. It would be impossible
for a chess engine to be as strong as shredder, and produce the garbage
analysis that you claim it does.

As an aside, a search on shredder creator Stefan Meyer–Kahlen turns up
no mention of your claim that his engine produces crappy analysis as a
feature.
___________________

Well, I certainly own copies of the Shredder 7 and Shredder 8 CDs, and have
them right here on my desktop. I bought the first from ChessCafe and the
second from Chess Outpost.

Do you bow deeply in reverence every time an exalted chess programmer utters
some holier than thou words in public, or not? Respect is earned in part by
writing unbuggy software, which most of them obviously can't do! But don't
take my word for it. Visit some of the chess forums where these things are
discussed, and read them daily for several weeks, and you'll find the true
answer for yourself...something that no amount of googling can produce.
-E


  #9   Report Post  
Old March 17th 04, 04:25 PM
Derek Wildstar
 
Posts: n/a
Default Shredder 8 bug?


"Euclid" wrote in message news:aRZ5c.7243

Do you bow deeply in reverence every time an exalted chess programmer

utters
some holier than thou words in public, or not? Respect is earned in part

by
writing unbuggy software, which most of them obviously can't do! But don't
take my word for it. Visit some of the chess forums where these things are
discussed, and read them daily for several weeks, and you'll find the true
answer for yourself...something that no amount of googling can produce.
-E


I have actually seen poor moves noted in the PV subsequent to the main move,
I have also seen that problem disappear under conditions in which I
specifically do not want to see it. In OTB, the subsequent moves are not
relevant, only the initial move. In analysis proper, the problem goes away.

"Running the engine for a long period of time, in the manner of OTB play, is
not the same as positional analysis." - This is the point you refuse to
understand, among others. Which is why people value the commentary of the
programmers who write the programs you seem to be having such a hard time
understanding.

Yes, Shredder 8 can have odd moves in the PV.

No, it's not something that needs to be addressed in OTB play.





  #10   Report Post  
Old March 17th 04, 07:54 PM
Liam Too
 
Posts: n/a
Default Shredder 8 bug?

Dear None,

Take it from me, I'm very impartial in assessing a programs. Shredder
8 really has some bugs. In infinite analysis, the first couple of
moves are brilliant, however down the line, you can see pieces, or
even the Queen being sacrificed for nothing in return. Weird indeed!

My CDs were legally bought.

Lance Smith


none wrote in message .cable.rogers.com...
Euclid wrote:
"HD" wrote in message
. dk...


I haven't seen anyone but you making this assertion Euclid. In fact when
I search on google it shows up posts made by you claiming the same
thing. I own, and use, both Fritz 8 and Shredder 8, and find that the
quality of analysis they give is the same. I have yet to see any garbage
analysis out of Shredder of the kind you claim.



Unfortunately I've it seen too. It's not a joke to me, since I've been
running through the single-line analysis of different engines with
different engines. What you might discover if you go over a line of
analysis from Shredder (copy to notationpane), is that the evaluation
provided by the engine is (extremely) wrong. I the evaluation from the
line you've copied says ie. 1.54, then you may experience it to end at,
say, 10.90 - or maybe -15.02, when you're stepping through it manually.
And that can be discovered with either Shredder itself or any other
engine. However, it's not unlikely that you have try over a period of
time - keeping an eye on it - because it's not a rule.
Another to see it, ofcause is to look at a lot of analysed posistions
and judge for yourself. Personally I don't have any doubts any longer.

HD
____________

"none" must not be using the right searchstring on google. Just searching
for my posts will only find my posts. You would have to use a more general
searchstring to find other people's posts, and that might not be easy to do.
The Shredder 7/8 analysis bug isn't debatable. It has been documented by
various people on CCC and elsewhere. It is now taken for common knowledge. A
few will still try to debate it, but they're wrong.
-E


Yeah it isn't easy to do, because it simply isn't there.

Shredder 7 chess analysis and Shredder 7 chess analysis problems, turns
up nothing.

Shredder 7 chess bug - turns up problems people have with illegal
warezed copies of Shredder 8. You turn up with some warez advice in this
thread.
The Shredder 7 analysis bug chess - turns up posts by you claiming it's
buggy, even though you don't own a copy.
Shredder704.eng analysis is nonsense - turns up posts by you claiming
its buggy. An actual chess programmer Gian-Carlo Pascutto (author of
Deep Sjeng) tries to explain to you in this thread how you are wrong.
You seem to ignore it.

So you can see how someone seeing only your name attached to these
assertions would easily come to the conclusion that you
a) Don't own a copy of Shredder, since you admitted as much in one of
the above threads.
b) Ignore insight giving to you by a professional chess programmer,
while not invalidating your assertions, makes them look weak.
c) Fail to understand how a chess engine works. It would be impossible
for a chess engine to be as strong as shredder, and produce the garbage
analysis that you claim it does.

As an aside, a search on shredder creator Stefan Meyer–Kahlen turns up
no mention of your claim that his engine produces crappy analysis as a
feature.

Reply
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Shredder 8-Junior 8, at game 30, Shredder squares up, 50% Live games! Anson rec.games.chess.computer (Computer Chess) 0 March 11th 04 11:17 PM
Shredder 8-Junior 8, at game 30, Shredder squares up, 50% Live games! Anson rec.games.chess.analysis (Chess Analysis) 0 March 11th 04 11:17 PM
Shredder 8 question The Darkness rec.games.chess.computer (Computer Chess) 10 February 20th 04 01:43 PM
Shredder 8 is much faster Euc1id rec.games.chess.computer (Computer Chess) 23 January 27th 04 04:27 PM
problem installing Shredder 7.04 UCI engine (XP) Euc1id rec.games.chess.computer (Computer Chess) 1 August 12th 03 07:36 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:00 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2019 ChessBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Chess"

 

Copyright © 2017