Top 10 Free Chess Engine Recommendations

And Gull 3 performed worse that's why Gull 2.8 is on list: http://www.computerchess.org.uk/ccrl/4040/cgi/compare_engines.cgi?family=Gull&print=Rating+list&print=Results+table&print=LOS+table&print=Ponder+hit+table&print=Eval+difference+table&print=Comopp+gamenum+table&print=Overlap+table&print=Score+with+common+opponents

I think it depends on what you want the engine to do for you. 

If you want to stay on top with the engine that defeats all other engines, then these engine to engine comparisons may be of interest.

But for many of us, what we want is an engine that gives us the most understandable, human analysis to help us understand where we made mistakes in lost games.  That may be an entirely different engine, one which has a better "sense" of positional play and tactics, rather than the ability to see a line 25 moves deep which is far beyond human interest or understanding.

So which one of all these engines mentioned in this thread uses linguistic geometry? I checked the top 5 from the list, and none of them mentions it. They surely would mention such a thing it they used it?

What is linguistic geometry? I found couple of papers:

http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.18.1035&rank=4

http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.115.6220&rank=8

http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/articleDetails.jsp?arnumber=727635

And a book:

https://scholar.google.com/scholar?cluster=370896889843255340&hl=ru&as_sdt=2005&sciodt=0,5

And even one draft  about chess:

http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.93.8073&rank=6

And this draft is the closest to chess thing I know about LG, which is obviously isn't use in current engines, because it's totally different approach

The fact that it was initiated by Botvinnik, for chess software purpose, links that theory even closer to chess.

The fact no one even haven't create even theoretical algorithm to use it in chess (not talking about creating real engine which can compete with current top10), puts that theory far from chess

You may try though, everyone would be welcome (and pretty sure you would have an opportunity to post an paper or too in famous magazines)

Actually, that would put that theory far from current chess software practice, not neccessarily far from chess.

But the name of Botvinnik doesn't put it close to chess either. Like if Einstein would win a case as a layer, that wouldn't put this case close to physics.

The theory might have an application in chess, but this have to be proven.

A better summary of the concept and its connections to Botvinnik is available at http://www.ucdenver.edu/academics/colleges/Engineering/research/Computer-Science-and-Engineering/Pages/ArtificialIntelligencyLinguisticGeometry.aspx

Boris Stilman wrote the papers that you found. My link is to his page.

komodo 9.12

https://sites.google.com/view/10chessengines/hometo get most popular chess engines