This is less prone to bugs because now it's up to the
compiler don't forget this important initialization.
No functional change.
Signed-off-by: Marco Costalba <mcostalba@gmail.com>
No change in functionality signature
The only functional change is that when we reach PLY_MAX,
we now return VALUE_DRAW instead of evaluating position.
But we reach PLY_MAX only when position is dead drawn and
transposition table is filled with draw scores, so this
shouldn't matter at all.
Signed-off-by: Marco Costalba <mcostalba@gmail.com>
This way razoring is always based on exact evaluation and
follows simple formula.
Joona's test results are positive:
32-bit 1CPU:
Mod - Orig: 1073 - 993
64-bit 4CPU:
Mod - Orig: 759 - 721
Functionality Signature: 11448962
Signed-off-by: Marco Costalba <mcostalba@gmail.com>
Also retire razoring margins vector and use
a simpler formula instead.
Now that we use a more accurate static evaluation
try to avoid useless null searches when we are well
below beta. And for teh same reason increase a bit
the razoring.
After 972 games at 1+0
Mod vs Orig +224 =558 -190 +12 ELO
Signed-off-by: Marco Costalba <mcostalba@gmail.com>
It means we have already received "stop" or "quit" commands.
This fixes an hang in tactical test in Fritz GUI. Bug
introduced by previous bug fix :-(
Signed-off-by: Marco Costalba <mcostalba@gmail.com>
According to UCI standard once engine receives 'go infinite'
command it should search until the "stop" command and do not exit
the search without being told so, even if PLY_MAX has been reached.
Patch is quite invasive because it cleanups some hacks used
by fixed depth and fixed nodes modes, mainly during benchmarks.
Bug found by Pascal Georges.
Signed-off-by: Marco Costalba <mcostalba@gmail.com>
So to have the same layout and be as much similar as
possible. The only functional change is that now we
try ttMove as first also in PV nodes and at the end
we save the ttMove, as it happens in search. This
should have almost zero impact on ELO but it seems
the correct thing to do.
Signed-off-by: Marco Costalba <mcostalba@gmail.com>
This is an important design change because we know
compute evaluation in each node.
This is a 2.0 type change!
After 977 games at 1+0
Mod vs Orig +236 =538 -202 51.74% +12 ELO
Signed-off-by: Marco Costalba <mcostalba@gmail.com>
Try to get a position evaluation better then
the quick one with the help of the TT table.
This allows the null search conditions and
chosen reductions to be more accurate.
After 908 games at 1+0
Mod vs Orig +209 =526 -173 +14 ELO
Functionality Signature: 16627355
Signed-off-by: Marco Costalba <mcostalba@gmail.com>
Linear rule, less aggressive then Dann's one.
It seems it scales well with depth. We will need to
verify against weaker engine if it keeps the score.
After 999 games at 1+0 on my Dual Core
Mod vs Orig +232 =534 -207 +9 ELO
After 1000 games by Martin Thoresen on his QUAD at 1+0
Mod vs Orig 521/479 52.10%
Functionality Signature: 17655312
Signed-off-by: Marco Costalba <mcostalba@gmail.com>
The most interesting thing is a bit of rewrite
and semplification in connected_moves()
No functional change.
Signed-off-by: Marco Costalba <mcostalba@gmail.com>
Because that's the correct meaning. Note that also the
corresponding UCI option has been renamed.
No functional change.
Signed-off-by: Marco Costalba <mcostalba@gmail.com>
It is not clear why is not true, even in single thread
case, but as a matter of fact it is not!
So remove it.
Signed-off-by: Marco Costalba <mcostalba@gmail.com>
Instead should be read by the corresponding UCI
option "Book File".
Bug reported and fixed by Justin Blanchard (Arch Linux)
Signed-off-by: Marco Costalba <mcostalba@gmail.com>
Was a long standing hidden bug from Glaurung times,
triggered only now that we enable IID at non PV nodes.
Signed-off-by: Marco Costalba <mcostalba@gmail.com>
We want to increrase the opportunities
of doing an exclusion search.
After 999 games at 1+0
Mod vs Orig +216 =574 -209 50.35% 503.0/999 +2 ELO
Signed-off-by: Marco Costalba <mcostalba@gmail.com>
Instead decrement history value on failure.
After 999 games at 1+0
Mod vs Orig +236 =558 -204 51.60% +11 ELO
Signed-off-by: Marco Costalba <mcostalba@gmail.com>
This way we avoid overwriting valuable TT entries which
are needed to calculate exclusion search extension for pv.
Mod - Orig: 483 - 410 (+28 elo!)
Signed-off-by: Marco Costalba <mcostalba@gmail.com>
After 999 games we are almost equal (+2 ELO),
but we have a good result against Rybka
Rybka 2.3.2a mp 32-bit vs Mod 254.5 - 242.5 +152/-140/=205 51.21%
Rybka 2.3.2a mp 32-bit vs Orig 259.5 - 236.5 +151/-128/=217 52.32%
Signed-off-by: Marco Costalba <mcostalba@gmail.com>
Now we always try to filter out moves, we will have
more wasted evaluation calls, but also more pruned
nodes.
After 786 games
Mod vs Orig +196 =413 -177 +8 ELO
Verified also against Rybka it increases score to 50-51%
Signed-off-by: Marco Costalba <mcostalba@gmail.com>
We might be asked to ponder mate or stalemate position.
This being the case, simply wait for stop or ponderhit.
Currently we crash.
UCI specs aren't clear on the issue, but it cost nothing to
add little check.
Signed-off-by: Marco Costalba <mcostalba@gmail.com>
Now we use a formula to calculate margins on the fly.
Node count has changed because we fixed a leftover when
we still where using FutilityMargins to calculate futilityValue
in the case that we had the evaluation score in TT.
Also small indentation fix.
Signed-off-by: Marco Costalba <mcostalba@gmail.com>
Increase pruning at low depths while tone downa bit at
higher depths (linearize a bit the logaritmic behaviour)
This goes togheter with IncrementalFutilityMargin decreased
to 4 compensate the bigger pruning effect.
Total pruned nodes are more or less the same. We go from 36%
of nodes after prune to 37% with this patch.
After 999 games at 1+0
Mod vs Orig +250 =526 -223 +9 ELO
Signed-off-by: Marco Costalba <mcostalba@gmail.com>
If we arrive until the exclusion search call then
we know that move == ttMove == tte->move()
But using ttMove in search call while, during excluded search
conditions we have used tte->Move()could be a little bit suboptimal.
On the other side using tte->move() also in search call is a bit ugly
so opt for the third choice that is the most clean becasue from the
conditions the reader easily understands that we are talking of ttMove
and that we ant to exclude the move we are evaluating in that moment.
Signed-off-by: Marco Costalba <mcostalba@gmail.com>
If tte->move() != MOVE_NONE then tte->move() == ttMove
What could happen is that we have a ttMove without a tte, or,
we have a tte but tte->move() == MOVE_NONE
No functional change.
Signed-off-by: Marco Costalba <mcostalba@gmail.com>
Due to IID we could have a ttMove and not a tte, or,
even if we have a tte they could belong to different
searches so that the depth and type of tte don't
have the same origin of the ttMove.
To fix this we always use tte entry in excluded search
condition and, after an IID, we reprobe the TT table.
No functional change. Apart from possible crash fix.
Signed-off-by: Marco Costalba <mcostalba@gmail.com>
They gave bad results:
Mod - Orig: 361 - 404
Master is now verified to be functional equivalent with F_63
Signed-off-by: Marco Costalba <mcostalba@gmail.com>
We already reset loseOnTime flag at the beginning of
a new game, so we can simplify a bit the ligic there.
No functional change.
Signed-off-by: Marco Costalba <mcostalba@gmail.com>
* New version is documented and logic should be easier to follow
* Add extra check to not use LSN with x moves / y seconds time control
* New code fixes some rear cases where old code (still) causes program to lose on time at move 1.
Signed-off-by: Marco Costalba <mcostalba@gmail.com>
