Apply good/bad history reduction also when inCheck #3619
Closed
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
passed STC: https://tests.stockfishchess.org/tests/view/60f1b68dd1189bed71812d40 LLR: 2.93 (-2.94,2.94) <-2.50,0.50> Total: 53472 W: 4078 L: 4008 D: 45386 Ptnml(0-2): 127, 3297, 19795, 3413, 104 passed LTC: https://tests.stockfishchess.org/tests/view/60f291e6d1189bed71812de3 LLR: 2.92 (-2.94,2.94) <-2.50,0.50> Total: 89712 W: 2651 L: 2632 D: 84429 Ptnml(0-2): 60, 2261, 40188, 2294, 53 Main idea is that, in some cases, 'in check' situations are not so different from 'not in check' ones. Trying to use piece count in order to select only a few 'in check' situations have failed LTC testing. It could be interesting to apply one of those ideas in other parts of the search function. Bench: 4962435
G-Lorenz
added a commit
to G-Lorenz/Stockfish
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 25, 2021
This commit removes the `!captureOrPromotion` condition from ttCapture reduction and from good/bad history reduction (similar to official-stockfish#3619). passed STC: https://tests.stockfishchess.org/tests/view/60fc734ad8a6b65b2f3a7922 LLR: 2.97 (-2.94,2.94) <-2.50,0.50> Total: 48680 W: 3855 L: 3776 D: 41049 Ptnml(0-2): 118, 3145, 17744, 3206, 127 passed LTC: https://tests.stockfishchess.org/tests/view/60fce7d5d8a6b65b2f3a794c LLR: 2.93 (-2.94,2.94) <-2.50,0.50> Total: 86528 W: 2471 L: 2450 D: 81607 Ptnml(0-2): 28, 2203, 38777, 2232, 24 Bench: 4951406
Closed
G-Lorenz
added a commit
to G-Lorenz/Stockfish
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 25, 2021
Try to "revert" PRs official-stockfish#3619 and official-stockfish#3629 using a different history reduction when inCheck=true and/or captureOrPromotion=true. Meanwhile check if the parameters in that area needs tuning after those PRs. Bench: 4951406
vondele
pushed a commit
to vondele/Stockfish
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 26, 2021
This commit removes the `!captureOrPromotion` condition from ttCapture reduction and from good/bad history reduction (similar to official-stockfish#3619). passed STC: https://tests.stockfishchess.org/tests/view/60fc734ad8a6b65b2f3a7922 LLR: 2.97 (-2.94,2.94) <-2.50,0.50> Total: 48680 W: 3855 L: 3776 D: 41049 Ptnml(0-2): 118, 3145, 17744, 3206, 127 passed LTC: https://tests.stockfishchess.org/tests/view/60fce7d5d8a6b65b2f3a794c LLR: 2.93 (-2.94,2.94) <-2.50,0.50> Total: 86528 W: 2471 L: 2450 D: 81607 Ptnml(0-2): 28, 2203, 38777, 2232, 24 closes official-stockfish#3629 Bench: 4951406
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
passed STC:
https://tests.stockfishchess.org/tests/view/60f1b68dd1189bed71812d40
LLR: 2.93 (-2.94,2.94) <-2.50,0.50>
Total: 53472 W: 4078 L: 4008 D: 45386
Ptnml(0-2): 127, 3297, 19795, 3413, 104
passed LTC:
https://tests.stockfishchess.org/tests/view/60f291e6d1189bed71812de3
LLR: 2.92 (-2.94,2.94) <-2.50,0.50>
Total: 89712 W: 2651 L: 2632 D: 84429
Ptnml(0-2): 60, 2261, 40188, 2294, 53
Main idea is that, in some cases, 'in check' situations are not so different from 'not in check' ones.
Trying to use piece count in order to select only a few 'in check' situations have failed LTC testing.
It could be interesting to apply one of those ideas in other parts of the search function.
Bench: 4962435