Skip to content

Bonus for double attacks on an unsupported pawn. #2205

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom
Closed
protonspring wants to merge 2 commits into from
Closed

Bonus for double attacks on an unsupported pawn. #2205

protonspring wants to merge 2 commits into from

Conversation

@protonspring
Copy link

@protonspring protonspring commented Jun 24, 2019

This is a functional change that rewards double attacks on an unsupported pawn.

STC (non-functional difference)
LLR: 2.96 (-2.94,2.94) [0.50,4.50]
Total: 83276 W: 18981 L: 18398 D: 45897
http://tests.stockfishchess.org/tests/view/5d0970500ebc5925cf0a77d4

LTC (incomplete looping version)
LLR: 0.50 (-2.94,2.94) [0.00,3.50]
Total: 82999 W: 14244 L: 13978 D: 54777
http://tests.stockfishchess.org/tests/view/5d0a8d480ebc5925cf0a8d58

LTC (completed non-looping version).
LLR: 2.96 (-2.94,2.94) [0.00,3.50]
Total: 223381 W: 38323 L: 37512 D: 147546
http://tests.stockfishchess.org/tests/view/5d0e80510ebc5925cf0ad320

Bench 3809056

@Rocky640
Copy link

Rocky640 commented Jun 24, 2019 •
edited
Loading

interesting result !
I would have expected that search would resolve such positions correctly on the very next move.

This is not a very common pattern, and when it happens, it will quickly disappear.
So I'm quite surprised that it passed LTC.
I would be even more surprised if this would resist a simplification.

Anyway, let's try to imagine a few cases.

a) If you have White d5 f5 against Black e6, and White to move
last move by Black was probably a capture on e6 and White is about to recapture on e6

b) If you have White d5 f5 against e6, and Black to move
last move by White was possibly a capture on d5 or f5
or the pawn on e6 was pinned or could not move for some reason.
and white wants to blast open the position and just pushed d4-d5 or f4-f5

Some possible follow-ups
a) Motif is so rare that the popcount() can be safely replaced with a bool()
But this would not pass a SPRT[0,4],
So try a simplification with bool() and also without the & ~theirAttacks

b) If it works, we probably can simply have this in the loop
if (lever) score += S(0, 20);

c) remove all this and tweak something in search for pawn captures (priority, SEE, extension,..)

@protonspring
Copy link
Author

protonspring commented Jun 25, 2019

This type of position is heavily influenced by whose turn it is, but AFAIK sideToMove is not stored in our pawnEntries. If it is our turn, this type of position is VERY good. If it is NOT our turn, it's neutral. either the opponent can simply take a pawn, or push to safety.

Sry to repeat this question from the forum, but have we ever done sideToMove in our pawn Entries? I suspect it also affects our passing pawn rules, etc.

@Rocky640
Copy link

Rocky640 commented Jun 25, 2019

One could also think that if we can capture a loose QUEEN and it is our turn, it would be very good too.
In the last 2-3 years, there were some attempts to use sideToMove in evaluate.cpp, but it never worked.

IIRC in SF6 there were still some sidetomove references in evaluate.cpp, especially in the kingdanger evaluation, but eventually this was all cleaned up.

I guess it relates to the NULL move heuristic in search.cpp

 if ((ss-1)->currentMove != MOVE_NULL)
        {
            int bonus = -(ss-1)->statScore / 512;

            ss->staticEval = eval = evaluate(pos) + bonus;
        }
        else
            ss->staticEval = eval = -(ss-1)->staticEval + 2 * Eval::Tempo;

Currently, the only sideToMove references in evaluate.cpp is to return the correct sign once we are done
(pos.side_to_move() == WHITE ? v : -v)

@snicolet snicolet closed this in d889bb4 Jun 27, 2019
@snicolet
Copy link
Member

snicolet commented Jun 27, 2019

Merged via d889bb4, congrats! :-)

MichaelB7 added a commit to MichaelB7/Stockfish that referenced this pull request Jun 27, 2019
@MichaelB7
Merge branch 'master' of https://github.com/official-stockfish/Stockfish
8ece8a6 
 into McCain official-stockfish#2205 official-stockfish#2207 official-stockfish#2160 official-stockfish#2163
MichaelB7 added a commit to MichaelB7/Stockfish that referenced this pull request Jun 27, 2019
@MichaelB7
Merge branch 'master' of https://github.com/official-stockfish/Stockfish
a403bf4 
 into XPro official-stockfish#2160 official-stockfish#2163 official-stockfish#2205 official-stockfish#2207
mstembera pushed a commit to mstembera/Stockfish that referenced this pull request Jun 27, 2019
Bonus for double attacks on unsupported pawns
9df9791 
This is a functional change that rewards double attacks on an unsupported pawns.

STC (non-functional difference)
LLR: 2.96 (-2.94,2.94) [0.50,4.50]
Total: 83276 W: 18981 L: 18398 D: 45897
http://tests.stockfishchess.org/tests/view/5d0970500ebc5925cf0a77d4

LTC (incomplete looping version)
LLR: 0.50 (-2.94,2.94) [0.00,3.50]
Total: 82999 W: 14244 L: 13978 D: 54777
http://tests.stockfishchess.org/tests/view/5d0a8d480ebc5925cf0a8d58

LTC (completed non-looping version).
LLR: 2.96 (-2.94,2.94) [0.00,3.50]
Total: 223381 W: 38323 L: 37512 D: 147546
http://tests.stockfishchess.org/tests/view/5d0e80510ebc5925cf0ad320

Closes official-stockfish#2205

Bench 3633546

----------------------------------

Comments by Alain SAVARD:

interesting result ! I would have expected that search would resolve such positions
correctly on the very next move. This is not a very common pattern, and when it happens,
it will quickly disappear. So I'm quite surprised that it passed LTC.
I would be even more surprised if this would resist a simplification.

Anyway, let's try to imagine a few cases.

a) If you have White d5 f5 against Black e6, and White to move
last move by Black was probably a capture on e6 and White is about to recapture on e6

b) If you have White d5 f5 against e6, and Black to move
last move by White was possibly a capture on d5 or f5
or the pawn on e6 was pinned or could not move for some reason.
and white wants to blast open the position and just pushed d4-d5 or f4-f5

Some possible follow-ups
a) Motif is so rare that the popcount() can be safely replaced with a bool()
But this would not pass a SPRT[0,4],
So try a simplification with bool() and also without the & ~theirAttacks

b) If it works, we probably can simply have this in the loop
if (lever) score += S(0, 20);

c) remove all this and tweak something in search for pawn captures (priority, SEE, extension,..)
mstembera pushed a commit to mstembera/Stockfish that referenced this pull request Jul 31, 2019
Bonus for double attacks on unsupported pawns
dac96dc 
This is a functional change that rewards double attacks on an unsupported pawns.

STC (non-functional difference)
LLR: 2.96 (-2.94,2.94) [0.50,4.50]
Total: 83276 W: 18981 L: 18398 D: 45897
http://tests.stockfishchess.org/tests/view/5d0970500ebc5925cf0a77d4

LTC (incomplete looping version)
LLR: 0.50 (-2.94,2.94) [0.00,3.50]
Total: 82999 W: 14244 L: 13978 D: 54777
http://tests.stockfishchess.org/tests/view/5d0a8d480ebc5925cf0a8d58

LTC (completed non-looping version).
LLR: 2.96 (-2.94,2.94) [0.00,3.50]
Total: 223381 W: 38323 L: 37512 D: 147546
http://tests.stockfishchess.org/tests/view/5d0e80510ebc5925cf0ad320

Closes official-stockfish#2205

Bench 3633546

----------------------------------

Comments by Alain SAVARD:

interesting result ! I would have expected that search would resolve such positions
correctly on the very next move. This is not a very common pattern, and when it happens,
it will quickly disappear. So I'm quite surprised that it passed LTC.
I would be even more surprised if this would resist a simplification.

Anyway, let's try to imagine a few cases.

a) If you have White d5 f5 against Black e6, and White to move
last move by Black was probably a capture on e6 and White is about to recapture on e6

b) If you have White d5 f5 against e6, and Black to move
last move by White was possibly a capture on d5 or f5
or the pawn on e6 was pinned or could not move for some reason.
and white wants to blast open the position and just pushed d4-d5 or f4-f5

Some possible follow-ups
a) Motif is so rare that the popcount() can be safely replaced with a bool()
But this would not pass a SPRT[0,4],
So try a simplification with bool() and also without the & ~theirAttacks

b) If it works, we probably can simply have this in the loop
if (lever) score += S(0, 20);

c) remove all this and tweak something in search for pawn captures (priority, SEE, extension,..)
mstembera pushed a commit to mstembera/Stockfish that referenced this pull request Aug 1, 2019
Bonus for double attacks on unsupported pawns
964a782 
This is a functional change that rewards double attacks on an unsupported pawns.

STC (non-functional difference)
LLR: 2.96 (-2.94,2.94) [0.50,4.50]
Total: 83276 W: 18981 L: 18398 D: 45897
http://tests.stockfishchess.org/tests/view/5d0970500ebc5925cf0a77d4

LTC (incomplete looping version)
LLR: 0.50 (-2.94,2.94) [0.00,3.50]
Total: 82999 W: 14244 L: 13978 D: 54777
http://tests.stockfishchess.org/tests/view/5d0a8d480ebc5925cf0a8d58

LTC (completed non-looping version).
LLR: 2.96 (-2.94,2.94) [0.00,3.50]
Total: 223381 W: 38323 L: 37512 D: 147546
http://tests.stockfishchess.org/tests/view/5d0e80510ebc5925cf0ad320

Closes official-stockfish#2205

Bench 3633546

----------------------------------

Comments by Alain SAVARD:

interesting result ! I would have expected that search would resolve such positions
correctly on the very next move. This is not a very common pattern, and when it happens,
it will quickly disappear. So I'm quite surprised that it passed LTC.
I would be even more surprised if this would resist a simplification.

Anyway, let's try to imagine a few cases.

a) If you have White d5 f5 against Black e6, and White to move
last move by Black was probably a capture on e6 and White is about to recapture on e6

b) If you have White d5 f5 against e6, and Black to move
last move by White was possibly a capture on d5 or f5
or the pawn on e6 was pinned or could not move for some reason.
and white wants to blast open the position and just pushed d4-d5 or f4-f5

Some possible follow-ups
a) Motif is so rare that the popcount() can be safely replaced with a bool()
But this would not pass a SPRT[0,4],
So try a simplification with bool() and also without the & ~theirAttacks

b) If it works, we probably can simply have this in the loop
if (lever) score += S(0, 20);

c) remove all this and tweak something in search for pawn captures (priority, SEE, extension,..)
@Alayan-stk-2 Alayan-stk-2 mentioned this pull request Aug 27, 2019
Closed
mstembera pushed a commit to mstembera/Stockfish that referenced this pull request Aug 29, 2019
Bonus for double attacks on unsupported pawns
23da24a 
This is a functional change that rewards double attacks on an unsupported pawns.

STC (non-functional difference)
LLR: 2.96 (-2.94,2.94) [0.50,4.50]
Total: 83276 W: 18981 L: 18398 D: 45897
http://tests.stockfishchess.org/tests/view/5d0970500ebc5925cf0a77d4

LTC (incomplete looping version)
LLR: 0.50 (-2.94,2.94) [0.00,3.50]
Total: 82999 W: 14244 L: 13978 D: 54777
http://tests.stockfishchess.org/tests/view/5d0a8d480ebc5925cf0a8d58

LTC (completed non-looping version).
LLR: 2.96 (-2.94,2.94) [0.00,3.50]
Total: 223381 W: 38323 L: 37512 D: 147546
http://tests.stockfishchess.org/tests/view/5d0e80510ebc5925cf0ad320

Closes official-stockfish#2205

Bench 3633546

----------------------------------

Comments by Alain SAVARD:

interesting result ! I would have expected that search would resolve such positions
correctly on the very next move. This is not a very common pattern, and when it happens,
it will quickly disappear. So I'm quite surprised that it passed LTC.
I would be even more surprised if this would resist a simplification.

Anyway, let's try to imagine a few cases.

a) If you have White d5 f5 against Black e6, and White to move
last move by Black was probably a capture on e6 and White is about to recapture on e6

b) If you have White d5 f5 against e6, and Black to move
last move by White was possibly a capture on d5 or f5
or the pawn on e6 was pinned or could not move for some reason.
and white wants to blast open the position and just pushed d4-d5 or f4-f5

Some possible follow-ups
a) Motif is so rare that the popcount() can be safely replaced with a bool()
But this would not pass a SPRT[0,4],
So try a simplification with bool() and also without the & ~theirAttacks

b) If it works, we probably can simply have this in the loop
if (lever) score += S(0, 20);

c) remove all this and tweak something in search for pawn captures (priority, SEE, extension,..)
pb00068 pushed a commit to pb00068/Stockfish that referenced this pull request Sep 10, 2019
@pb00068
Bonus for double attacks on unsupported pawns
c06ee41 
This is a functional change that rewards double attacks on an unsupported pawns.

STC (non-functional difference)
LLR: 2.96 (-2.94,2.94) [0.50,4.50]
Total: 83276 W: 18981 L: 18398 D: 45897
http://tests.stockfishchess.org/tests/view/5d0970500ebc5925cf0a77d4

LTC (incomplete looping version)
LLR: 0.50 (-2.94,2.94) [0.00,3.50]
Total: 82999 W: 14244 L: 13978 D: 54777
http://tests.stockfishchess.org/tests/view/5d0a8d480ebc5925cf0a8d58

LTC (completed non-looping version).
LLR: 2.96 (-2.94,2.94) [0.00,3.50]
Total: 223381 W: 38323 L: 37512 D: 147546
http://tests.stockfishchess.org/tests/view/5d0e80510ebc5925cf0ad320

Closes official-stockfish#2205

Bench 3633546

----------------------------------

Comments by Alain SAVARD:

interesting result ! I would have expected that search would resolve such positions
correctly on the very next move. This is not a very common pattern, and when it happens,
it will quickly disappear. So I'm quite surprised that it passed LTC.
I would be even more surprised if this would resist a simplification.

Anyway, let's try to imagine a few cases.

a) If you have White d5 f5 against Black e6, and White to move
last move by Black was probably a capture on e6 and White is about to recapture on e6

b) If you have White d5 f5 against e6, and Black to move
last move by White was possibly a capture on d5 or f5
or the pawn on e6 was pinned or could not move for some reason.
and white wants to blast open the position and just pushed d4-d5 or f4-f5

Some possible follow-ups
a) Motif is so rare that the popcount() can be safely replaced with a bool()
But this would not pass a SPRT[0,4],
So try a simplification with bool() and also without the & ~theirAttacks

b) If it works, we probably can simply have this in the loop
if (lever) score += S(0, 20);

c) remove all this and tweak something in search for pawn captures (priority, SEE, extension,..)
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

No reviews

Assignees

No one assigned

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants

@protonspring @Rocky640 @snicolet