In endgame it's better to have pawns on both wings.
So give a bonus according to file distance between left
and right outermost pawns.
Passed both short TC
LLR: 2.97 (-2.94,2.94) [-1.50,4.50]
Total: 39073 W: 7749 L: 7536 D: 23788
And long TC
LLR: 2.96 (-2.94,2.94) [0.00,6.00]
Total: 6149 W: 1040 L: 910 D: 4199
bench: 7665034
Reduce eval discontinuity becuase now we kick in
king safety evaluation in many more cases.
Passed both short TC:
LLR: 2.95 (-2.94,2.94) [-1.50,4.50]
Total: 8708 W: 1742 L: 1613 D: 5353
And long TC:
LLR: 2.95 (-2.94,2.94) [0.00,6.00]
Total: 6743 W: 1122 L: 990 D: 4631
bench: 6835416
Tighter lower bound for pawn attacks so to
activate king safety in some cases like here:
6k1/2B3p1/2Pp1p2/2nPp3/2Q1P2K/P2n1qP1/R6P/1R6 w
Original patch by Chris, further simplified by
Jörg Oster.
Passed both short TC
LLR: 2.96 (-2.94,2.94) [-1.50,4.50]
Total: 30171 W: 5887 L: 5700 D: 18584
And long TC
LLR: 2.97 (-2.94,2.94) [0.00,6.00]
Total: 20706 W: 3402 L: 3204 D: 14100
bench: 7607562
Add a bonus according if the attacking
pieces are minor or major.
Passed both short TC
LLR: 2.96 (-2.94,2.94) [-1.50,4.50]
Total: 13142 W: 2625 L: 2483 D: 8034
And long TC
LLR: 2.95 (-2.94,2.94) [0.00,6.00]
Total: 18059 W: 3031 L: 2844 D: 12184
bench: 7425809
A great simplification that shows no regression
and it seems even a bit scalable.
Tested with fixed number of games:
Short TC
ELO: 0.60 +-2.1 (95%) LOS: 71.1%
Total: 39554 W: 7477 L: 7409 D: 24668
Long TC
ELO: 2.97 +-2.0 (95%) LOS: 99.8%
Total: 36424 W: 5894 L: 5583 D: 24947
bench: 8184352
Change updating rule after a TT hit to match
the same one at the end of the search.
Small change in functionality, but we want to
have uniform rules in the code.
bench: 7767864
We already update killers so it is natural to extend to
history and counter move too.
Passed both short TC
LLR: 2.95 (-2.94,2.94) [-1.50,4.50]
Total: 52690 W: 9955 L: 9712 D: 33023
And long TC
LLR: 2.96 (-2.94,2.94) [0.00,6.00]
Total: 5555 W: 935 L: 808 D: 3812
bench: 7876473
After a fail high in LMR, if reduction is very high do
a research at lower depth before teh full depth one.
Chances are that the re-search will fail low and the
full depth one is skipped.
Passed both short TC:
LLR: 2.95 (-2.94,2.94) [-1.50,4.50]
Total: 11363 W: 2204 L: 2069 D: 7090
And long TC:
LLR: 2.95 (-2.94,2.94) [0.00,6.00]
Total: 7292 W: 1195 L: 1061 D: 5036
bench: 7869223
Since all ENPASSANT moves are now considered dangerous, this
change of order should give a slight speedup.
Also simplify futilityValue formula.
No functional change.
We avoid to use an ad-hoc table at the cost of a
relative_rank() call in advanced_pawn_push().
On my 32 bit system it is even slightly faster (on 64bit
may be different). This is the speed in nps alternating
old and new bench runs:
new
368890
368825
369972
old
367798
367635
368026
No functional change.
Instead of a passed pawn now we just require the pawn to
be in the opponent camp to be considered a dangerous
move. Added some renaming to reflect the change.
Passed both short TC test
LLR: 2.95 (-2.94,2.94) [-1.50,4.50]
Total: 10358 W: 2033 L: 1900 D: 6425
And long TC
LLR: 2.95 (-2.94,2.94) [0.00,6.00]
Total: 21459 W: 3486 L: 3286 D: 14687
bench: 8322172
To align to same named Position function and
avoid using std::cout directly.
Also remove some stale <iostream> include while
there.
No functional change.
Add a Mac SSE4.2 target. Also change the Mac OS X minimum version to
10.6. Rationale: 97% of Macs run at least 10.6, version 10.9 is now
free, and using 10.6 as the minimum version gives a small 5% boost in
benchmark speed over versions using 10.0 as the minimum version.
Finally, enable Clang’s Link Time Optimization when compiling for the
Mac.
No functional change.
An old idea retested at SPRT(0, 3) with 60+0.05 TC:
LLR: 2.95 (-2.94,2.94) [0.00,3.00]
Total: 98872 W: 15549 L: 15123 D: 68200
This is a very small elo increase patch so it really
stresses the limits of fishtest.
bench: 8596156
It seems to intorduce a regression when tested
with 3 threads at 15+0.05:
ELO: -2.26 +-2.2 (95%) LOS: 2.4%
Total: 30000 W: 4813 L: 5008 D: 20179
bench: 8331357
Tested setting FakeSplit to true and running
./stockfish bench 128 2
There is a different signature with and without
the patch so it affects functionality but
only in SMP case.
bench: 8331357
SMP case is very tricky and raises an assert in stage_moves():
assert(stage == KILLERS_S1 || stage == QUIETS_1_S1 || stage == QUIETS_2_S1)
So rewrite the code to just return moves[] when we are sure
we are in quiet moves stages.
Also rename stage_moves to quiet_moves to reflect that.
No functional change (but needs testing in SMP case)
Use MovePicker moves[] to access already tried
quiet moves. A bit of care shall be taken
to avoid calling stage_moves() when we are still
at ttMove stage, because moves are yet to be
generated. Actually our staging move generation
makes this code a bit more tricky than what I'd
like, but removing an ausiliary redundant
array like quietsSearched[] is a good thing.
Idea by DiscoCheck
bench: 9355734
Use the newly introduced LineBB[] to simplify this
super hot-path function.
Verified with perft we don't have any speed regression, although
the number of squares removed is less than before in case of
contact check.
Insipred by DiscoCheck implementation.
Perft numbers are the same, but we have an harmless functional
change due to reorder of moves, because now some illegal moves
are no more detected at generation time, but in the search.
bench: 8331357
This seems a die hard idea :-)
Passed both short TC
LLR: 2.97 (-2.94,2.94) [-1.50,4.50]
Total: 17485 W: 3307 L: 3156 D: 11022
And long TC
LLR: 2.97 (-2.94,2.94) [0.00,6.00]
Total: 38181 W: 6002 L: 5729 D: 26450
bench: 8659830
Actually, it is not used, as both arrays have the
same values. Some local tests in either direction
showed no improvement.
Also some minor corrections in the comments.
No functional change.
Previously some squares could be "incorrectly" awarded
to a pinned piece.
e.g. in 3k4/1q6/3b4/3Q4/8/5K2/B7/8 b - - 0 1 the black
bishop get 4 squares too many and the white queen gets 6.
Passed both short TC.
LLR: 2.97 (-2.94,2.94) [-1.50,4.50]
Total: 4871 W: 934 L: 817 D: 3120
And long TC:
LLR: 2.96 (-2.94,2.94) [0.00,6.00]
Total: 38968 W: 6113 L: 5837 D: 27018
bench: 9282549
But compensate by reducing rook and queen
value by 53 = (160 / 3)
Material imbalances are affected as follows:
Red. Major Rook Queen Total
QRR +160 -2*53 -53 +1
QR +160 -53 -53 +54
RR +160 -2*53 0 +54
R 0 -53 0 -53
Q 0 0 -53 -53
so that the imbalance changes by at most 54 + 53 = 107 units.
This corresponds to appromximately 3.5cp in the final evaluation.
Verified with fixed number 40000 games at both short
and long TC it does not regress.
Short TC 15+0.05
ELO: 1.93 +-2.1 (95%) LOS: 96.6%
Total: 40000 W: 7520 L: 7298 D: 25182
Long TC 60+0.05
ELO: -0.33 +-1.9 (95%) LOS: 36.5%
Total: 39663 W: 6067 L: 6105 D: 27491
bench: 6703846
As, Gary (that analyzed the bug) says:
SF does not print a PV when the original best move fails low,
we hit our time allowance, and stop the search. The output from
the SF search is below. It was failing low on Ne1 at depth 34.
Then, we get bestmove Qd3, but no PV change.
info depth 34 seldepth 45 score cp 38 upperbound nodes 483484489 nps 15464575 time 31264 multipv 1 pv f3e1 h5h4 e1d3 h4g3 f2g3 a6f6 f1f6 e7f6 d1a4 f6e7 a1f1 d8f8 a4b3 b7b6 b3c2 f7f6 c2a4 h3g5 b2b3 g5f7 a4c6 f7d6 h1g2 f6f5 e4f5 d6f5
info depth 34 seldepth 45 score cp 38 upperbound nodes 483484489 nps 15464575 time 31264 multipv 1 pv f3e1 h5h4 e1d3 h4g3 f2g3 a6f6 f1f6 e7f6 d1a4 f6e7 a1f1 d8f8 a4b3 b7b6 b3c2 f7f6 c2a4 h3g5 b2b3 g5f7 a4c6 f7d6 h1g2 f6f5 e4f5 d6f5
info depth 34 seldepth 47 score cp 30 upperbound nodes 2112334132 nps 17255517 time 122415 multipv 1 pv f3e1 h5h4 d1a4 a6f6 e1d3 d8f8 a4c2 h4g3 f2g3 f6f1 a1f1 h7g8 b2b3 f7f6 a3a4 b7b6
info depth 34 seldepth 47 score cp 30 upperbound nodes 2112334132 nps 17255517 time 122415 multipv 1 pv f3e1 h5h4 d1a4 a6f6 e1d3 d8f8 a4c2 h4g3 f2g3 f6f1 a1f1 h7g8 b2b3 f7f6 a3a4 b7b6
info nodes 18235667001 time 969824
bestmove e2d3 ponder c8d7
Looking at the code, if we hit Signals.stop, we return from id_loop
before printing any PV. It is possible for us to have resorted the
RootMove list though, which will change the move that is actually
played.
No functional change.
