This idea is a result of my second condition combination tuning for reductions:
https://tests.stockfishchess.org/tests/view/643ed5573806eca398f06d61
There were used two parameters per combination: one for the 'sign' of the first and the second condition in a combination. Values >= 50 indicate using a condition directly and values <= -50 means use the negation of a condition.
Each condition pair (X,Y) had two occurances dependent of the order of the two conditions:
- if X < Y the parameters used for more reduction
- if X > Y the parameters used for less reduction
- if X = Y then only one condition is present and A[X][X][0]/A[X][X][1] stands for using more/less reduction for only this condition.
The parameter pair A[7][2][0] (value = -94.70) and A[7][2][1] (value = 93.60) was one of the strongest signals with values near 100/-100.
Here condition nr. 7 was '(ss+1)->cutoffCnt > 3' and condition nr. 2 'move == ttMove'. For condition nr. 7 the negation is used because A[7][2][0] is negative.
This translates finally to less reduction (because 7 > 2) for tt moves if child cutoffs <= 3.
STC:
LLR: 2.94 (-2.94,2.94) <0.00,2.00>
Total: 65728 W: 17704 L: 17358 D: 30666
Ptnml(0-2): 184, 7092, 18008, 7354, 226
https://tests.stockfishchess.org/tests/view/643ff767ef2529086a7ed042
LTC:
LLR: 2.95 (-2.94,2.94) <0.50,2.50>
Total: 139200 W: 37776 L: 37282 D: 64142
Ptnml(0-2): 58, 13241, 42509, 13733, 59
https://tests.stockfishchess.org/tests/view/6440bfa9ef2529086a7edbc7
closes https://github.com/official-stockfish/Stockfish/pull/4538
Bench: 3548023
This patch is a simplification of my recent elo gainer.
Logically the Elo gainer didn't make much sense and this patch simplifies it into smth more logical.
Instead of assigning negative bonuses to all non-first moves that enter PV nodes
we assign positive bonuses in full depth search after LMR only for moves that
will result in a fail high - thus not assigning positive bonuses
for moves that will go to pv search - so doing "almost" the same as we do in master now for them.
Logic differs for some other moves, though, but this removes some lines of code.
Passed STC:
https://tests.stockfishchess.org/tests/view/642cf5cf77ff3301150dc5ec
LLR: 2.94 (-2.94,2.94) <-1.75,0.25>
Total: 409320 W: 109124 L: 109308 D: 190888
Ptnml(0-2): 1149, 45385, 111751, 45251, 1124
Passed LTC:
https://tests.stockfishchess.org/tests/view/642fe75d20eb941419bde200
LLR: 2.94 (-2.94,2.94) <-1.75,0.25>
Total: 260336 W: 70280 L: 70303 D: 119753
Ptnml(0-2): 99, 25236, 79528, 25199, 106
closes https://github.com/official-stockfish/Stockfish/pull/4522
Bench: 4286815
Since bestValue becomes value and beta - alpha is always non-negative,
extraReduction is always false, hence it has no effect.
This patch includes small changes to improve readability.
closes https://github.com/official-stockfish/Stockfish/pull/4505
No functional change
This patch simplifies initialization of statScore to "always set it up to 0" instead of setting it up to 0 two plies deeper.
Reason for why it was done in previous way partially was because of LMR usage of previous statScore which was simplified long time ago so it makes sense to make in more simple there.
Passed STC:
https://tests.stockfishchess.org/tests/view/641a86d1db43ab2ba6f7b31d
LLR: 2.95 (-2.94,2.94) <-1.75,0.25>
Total: 115648 W: 30895 L: 30764 D: 53989
Ptnml(0-2): 368, 12741, 31473, 12876, 366
Passed LTC:
https://tests.stockfishchess.org/tests/view/641b1c31db43ab2ba6f7d17a
LLR: 2.96 (-2.94,2.94) <-1.75,0.25>
Total: 175576 W: 47122 L: 47062 D: 81392
Ptnml(0-2): 91, 17077, 53390, 17141, 89
closes https://github.com/official-stockfish/Stockfish/pull/4460
bench 5081969
Patch analyzes field after SEE exchanges concluded with a recapture by
the opponent:
if opponent Queen/Rook/King results under attack after the exchanges, we
consider the move sharp and don't prune it.
Important note:
By accident I forgot to adjust 'occupied' when the king takes part in
the exchanges.
As result of this a move is considered sharp too, when opponent king
apparently can evade check by recapturing.
Surprisingly this seems contribute to patch's strength.
STC:
https://tests.stockfishchess.org/tests/view/640b16132644b62c33947397
LLR: 2.96 (-2.94,2.94) <0.00,2.00>
Total: 116400 W: 31239 L: 30817 D: 54344
Ptnml(0-2): 350, 12742, 31618, 13116, 374
LTC:
https://tests.stockfishchess.org/tests/view/640c88092644b62c3394c1c5
LLR: 2.95 (-2.94,2.94) <0.50,2.50>
Total: 177600 W: 47988 L: 47421 D: 82191
Ptnml(0-2): 62, 16905, 54317, 17436, 80
closes https://github.com/official-stockfish/Stockfish/pull/4453
bench: 5012145
in a some of cases movepicker returned some moves more than once which lead
to them being searched more than once. This bug was possible because of how
we use queen promotions - they are generated as a captures but are not
included in position function which checks if move is a capture. Thus if
any refutation (killer or countermove) was a queen promotion it was
searched twice - once as a capture and one as a refutation.
This patch affects various things, namely stats assignments for queen promotions
and other moves if best move is queen promotion,
also some heuristics in search and qsearch.
With this patch every queen promotion is now considered a capture.
After this patch number of found duplicated moves is 0 during normal 13 depth bench run.
Passed STC:
https://tests.stockfishchess.org/tests/view/63f77e01e74a12625bcd87d7
LLR: 2.95 (-2.94,2.94) <-1.75,0.25>
Total: 80920 W: 21455 L: 21289 D: 38176
Ptnml(0-2): 198, 8839, 22241, 8963, 219
Passed LTC:
https://tests.stockfishchess.org/tests/view/63f7e020e74a12625bcd9a76
LLR: 2.94 (-2.94,2.94) <-1.75,0.25>
Total: 89712 W: 23674 L: 23533 D: 42505
Ptnml(0-2): 24, 8737, 27202, 8860, 33
closes https://github.com/official-stockfish/Stockfish/pull/4405
bench 4681731
Call the recently added hint function for NNUE accumulator update after a failed probcut search.
In this case we already searched at least some captures and tt move which, however, is not sufficient for a cutoff.
So it seems we have a greater chance that the full search will also have no cutoff and hence all moves have to be searched.
STC: https://tests.stockfishchess.org/tests/view/63fa74a4e74a12625bce1823
LLR: 2.94 (-2.94,2.94) <0.00,2.00>
Total: 70096 W: 18770 L: 18423 D: 32903
Ptnml(0-2): 191, 7342, 19654, 7651, 210
To be sure that we have no heavy interaction retest on top of #4410.
Rebased STC: https://tests.stockfishchess.org/tests/view/63fb2f62e74a12625bce3b03
LLR: 2.95 (-2.94,2.94) <0.00,2.00>
Total: 137688 W: 36790 L: 36349 D: 64549
Ptnml(0-2): 397, 14373, 38919, 14702, 453
closes https://github.com/official-stockfish/Stockfish/pull/4411
No functional change
Credits to Stefan Geschwentner (locutus2) showing that the hint
is useful on PvNodes. In contrast to his test,
this version avoids to use the hint when in check.
I believe checking positions aren't good candidates for the hint
because:
- evasion moves are rather few, so a checking pos. has much less childs
than a normal position
- if the king has to move the NNUE eval can't use incremental updates,
so the child nodes have to do a full refresh anyway.
Passed STC:
https://tests.stockfishchess.org/tests/view/63f9c5b1e74a12625bcdf585
LLR: 2.95 (-2.94,2.94) <0.00,2.00>
Total: 124472 W: 33268 L: 32846 D: 58358
Ptnml(0-2): 350, 12986, 35170, 13352, 378
closes https://github.com/official-stockfish/Stockfish/pull/4410
no functional change
This patch introduces `hint_common_parent_position()` to signal that potentially several child nodes will require an NNUE eval. By populating explicitly the accumulator, these subsequent evaluations can be performed more efficiently.
This was based on the observation that calculating the evaluation in an excluded move position yielded a significant Elo gain, even though the evaluation itself was already available (work by pb00067).
Sopel wrote the code to perform just the accumulator update. This PR is based on cleaned up code that
passed STC:
https://tests.stockfishchess.org/tests/view/63f62f9be74a12625bcd4aa0
LLR: 2.94 (-2.94,2.94) <0.50,2.50>
Total: 110368 W: 29607 L: 29167 D: 51594
Ptnml(0-2): 41, 10551, 33572, 10967, 53
and in an the earlier (equivalent) version
passed STC:
https://tests.stockfishchess.org/tests/view/63f3c3fee74a12625bcce2a6
LLR: 2.95 (-2.94,2.94) <0.00,2.00>
Total: 47552 W: 12786 L: 12467 D: 22299
Ptnml(0-2): 120, 5107, 12997, 5438, 114
passed LTC:
https://tests.stockfishchess.org/tests/view/63f45cc2e74a12625bccfa63
LLR: 2.94 (-2.94,2.94) <0.50,2.50>
Total: 110368 W: 29607 L: 29167 D: 51594
Ptnml(0-2): 41, 10551, 33572, 10967, 53
closes https://github.com/official-stockfish/Stockfish/pull/4402
Bench: 3726250
This patch is a simplification / code normalisation in qsearch.
Adds steps in comments the same way we have in search;
Makes a separate "pruning" stage instead of heuristics randomly being spread over qsearch code;
Reorders pruning heuristics from least taxing ones to more taxing ones;
Removes repeated check for best value not being mated, instead uses 1 check - thus removes some lines of code.
Moves prefetch and move setup after pruning - makes no sense to do them if move will actually get pruned.
Passed non-regression test:
https://tests.stockfishchess.org/tests/view/63dd2c5ff9a50a69252c1413
LLR: 2.95 (-2.94,2.94) <-1.75,0.25>
Total: 113504 W: 29898 L: 29770 D: 53836
Ptnml(0-2): 287, 11861, 32327, 11991, 286
https://github.com/official-stockfish/Stockfish/pull/4382
Non-functional change.
PR consists of 2 improvements on nodes with excludeMove:
1. Remove xoring the posKey with make_key(excludedMove)
Since we never call tte->save anymore with excludedMove,
the unique left purpose of the xoring was to avoid a TT hit.
Nevertheless on a normal bench run this produced ~25 false positives
(key collisions)
To avoid that we now forbid early TT cutoff's with excludeMove
Maybe these accesses to TT with xored key caused useless misses
in the CPU caches (L1, L2 ...)
Now doing the probe with the same key as the enclosing search does,
should hit the CPU cache.
2. Don't probe Tablebases with excludedMove.
This can't be tested on fishtest, but it's obvious that
tablebases don't deliver any information about suboptimal moves.
Side note:
Very surprisingly it looks like we cannot use static eval's from
TT since they slightly differ over time due to changing optimism.
Attempts to use static eval's from TT did loose about 13 ELO.
This is something about to investigate.
LTC: https://tests.stockfishchess.org/tests/view/63dc0f8de9d4cdfbe672d0c6
LLR: 2.94 (-2.94,2.94) <0.50,2.50>
Total: 44736 W: 12046 L: 11733 D: 20957
Ptnml(0-2): 12, 4212, 13617, 4505, 22
An analogue of this passed STC & LTC
see PR #4374 (thanks Dubslow for reviewing!)
closes https://github.com/official-stockfish/Stockfish/pull/4380
Bench: 4758694
Current master prunes all moves with negative SEE values in qsearch.
This patch sets constant negative threshold thus allowing some moves with negative SEE values to be searched.
Value of threshold is completely arbitrary and can be tweaked - also it as function of depth can be tried.
Original idea by author of Alexandria engine.
Passed STC
https://tests.stockfishchess.org/tests/view/63d79a59a67dd929a5564976
LLR: 2.94 (-2.94,2.94) <0.00,2.00>
Total: 34864 W: 9392 L: 9086 D: 16386
Ptnml(0-2): 113, 3742, 9429, 4022, 126
Passed LTC
https://tests.stockfishchess.org/tests/view/63d8074aa67dd929a5565bc2
LLR: 2.95 (-2.94,2.94) <0.50,2.50>
Total: 91616 W: 24532 L: 24126 D: 42958
Ptnml(0-2): 32, 8840, 27662, 9238, 36
closes https://github.com/official-stockfish/Stockfish/pull/4376
Bench: 4010877
