Commit Graph
6 Commits
Author SHA1 Message Date
DU-jdtoandStéphane Nicolet ed26d71354 Fix a few minor code style inconsistencies
No functional change.
2018-03-21 01:35:05 +01:00
DU-jdtoandStéphane Nicolet 16b31bb249 More robust interaction of singular search and iid
When iid (Internal iterative deepening) is invoked, the prior value of ttValue is
not guaranteed to be VALUE_NONE. As such, it is currently possible to enter a state
in which ttValue has a specific value which is inconsistent with tte->bound() and
tte->depth(). Currently, ttValue is only used within the search in a context that
prevents this situation from making a difference (and so this change is non-functional,
but this is not guaranteed to remain the case in the future.

For instance, just changing the tt depth condition in singular extension node to be

    tte->depth() >= depth - 4 * ONE_PLY

instead of

    tte->depth() >= depth - 3 * ONE_PLY

interacts badly with the absence of ttMove in iid. For the ttMove to become a singular
extension candidate, singularExtensionNode needs to be true. With the current master,
this requires that tte->depth() >= depth - 3 * ONE_PLY. This is not currently possible
if tte comes from IID, since the depth 'd' used for the IID search is always less than
depth - 4 * ONE_PLY for depth >= 8 * ONE_PLY (below depth 8 singularExtensionNode can
never be true anyway). However, with DU-jdto/Stockfish@251281a , this condition can be
met, and it is possible for singularExtensionNode to become true after IID. There are
then two mechanisms by which this patch can affect the search:

• If ttValue was VALUE_NONE prior to IID, the fact that this patch sets ttValue allows
  the 'ttValue != VALUE_NONE' condition of singularExtensionNode to be met.

• If ttValue wasn't VALUE_NONE prior to IID, the fact that this patch modifies ttValue's
  value causes a different 'rBeta' to be calculated if the singular extension search is
  performed.

Tested at STC for non-regression:
LLR: 2.95 (-2.94,2.94) [-3.00,1.00]
Total: 76981 W: 17060 L: 17048 D: 42873
http://tests.stockfishchess.org/tests/view/5a7738b70ebc5902971a9868

No functional change
2018-02-25 01:15:38 +01:00
DU-jdtoandStéphane Nicolet 5d57bb467a Simplification: do razoring only for depth 1
The razoring heuristic is quite a drastic pruning technique,
using a depth 0 search at internal nodes of the search tree
to estimate the true value of depth n nodes. This patch limits
this razoring to the case of internal nodes of depth 1.
Author: Jarrod Torriero (DU-jdto)

STC:
LLR: 2.95 (-2.94,2.94) [-3.00,1.00]
Total: 8043 W: 1865 L: 1716 D: 4462
http://tests.stockfishchess.org/tests/view/5a90a9290ebc590297cc86c1

LTC:
LLR: 2.95 (-2.94,2.94) [-3.00,1.00]
Total: 32890 W: 5577 L: 5476 D: 21837
http://tests.stockfishchess.org/tests/view/5a90c8510ebc590297cc86d5

Opportunities opened by this patch: it would be interesting to
know if it brings Elo to re-introduce razoring or soft razoring
at depth >= 2, maybe using a larger margin to compensate for the
increased pruning effect.

Bench: 5227124
2018-02-24 13:12:04 +01:00
DU-jdtoandJoona Kiiski c737062436 Remove some pointless micro-optimizations
Seems to give around 1% speed-up for CPUs with popcnt support.
Seems to give a very minor speed-up for CPUs without popcnt.

No functional change

Resolves #646
2016-04-23 02:04:28 +01:00
DU-jdtoandJoona Kiiski 1cbba8d6fa Small passed pawn simplification
STC:
LLR: 2.95 (-2.94,2.94) [-3.00,1.00]
Total: 21993 W: 4197 L: 4078 D: 13718

LTC:
LLR: 2.96 (-2.94,2.94) [-3.00,1.00]
Total: 67213 W: 9135 L: 9077 D: 49001

Bench: 7482426

Resolves #622
2016-04-08 19:48:03 +01:00
DU-jdtoandJoona Kiiski e3c85c314d Remove another unnecessary Search::Stack field
No functional change

Resolves #535
2015-12-22 17:16:15 +00:00