Commit Graph
6 Commits
Author SHA1 Message Date
Guenther DemetzandMarco Costalba 943ae89be1 Fix pin-aware SEE
Correct pinners calculation and fix bug with pinned
pieces giving check. With this patch 'pinners' only
returns sliders with exactly one defensive piece between
the slider and the attacked square (in other words, pinners
returns exact pinners).

This was a co-operation between Marco Costalba,
Stéphane Nicolet and me.

Special thanks to Ronald de Man for reporting the bug with
pinned pieces giving check, discussed here:
https://groups.google.com/forum/?fromgroups=#!topic/fishcooking/S_4E_Xs5HaE

STC:
LLR: 2.95 (-2.94,2.94) [-3.00,1.00]
Total: 132118 W: 23578 L: 23645 D: 84895

LTC:
LLR: 2.95 (-2.94,2.94) [-3.00,1.00]
Total: 36424 W: 4770 L: 4670 D: 26984

bench: 6272231
2016-09-21 08:42:25 +02:00
Guenther DemetzandMarco Costalba ace8e951d7 Simplify code for pinaware SEE
This is the most compact and neatest version
is was able to produce.

On normal builds I have a small slowdown:
normal builds base vs. simplification (gcc 4.8.1 Win7-64 i7-3770 @ 3.4GHz x86-64-modern)
Results for 20 tests for each version:

        Base      Test      Diff
Mean    1974744   1969333   5411
StDev   11825     10281     5874
p-value: 0,178
speedup: -0,003

On pgo-builds however I measure a nice 1.1% speedup

pgo-builds base vs. simplification
Results for 20 tests for each version:

        Base      Test      Diff
Mean    1974119   1995444   -21325
StDev   8703      5717      4623
p-value: 1
speedup: 0,011

No functional change.
2016-09-12 15:45:00 +02:00
Guenther DemetzandMarco Costalba 90ce24b11e Pinned aware SEE
Don't allow pinned pieces to attack the exchange-square as long all
pinners (this includes also potential ones) are on their original
square.
As soon a pinner moves to the exchange-square or get captured on it, we
fall back to standard SEE behaviour.

This correctly handles the majority of cases with absolute pins.

bench: 6883133
2016-09-12 09:31:09 +02:00
Guenther DemetzandJoona Kiiski 9a10313a9d rotating symmetric patterns with increasing skipsize
STC:
LLR: 2.95 (-2.94,2.94) [0.00,5.00] sprt @ 5+0.1 th 21
Total: 7068 W: 1121 L: 975 D: 4972

LTC:
LLR: 2.96 (-2.94,2.94) [-3.00,1.00] sprt @ 12+0.12 th 21
Total: 26691 W: 3594 L: 3481 D: 19616

No functional change with a single thread

Resolves #574
2016-01-24 14:08:01 +00:00
Guenther DemetzandJoona Kiiski 12eb345ebd Depth margin parameter-tweak in TT-save
Verified that is improvement with multiple threads:

LLR: 2.95 (-2.94,2.94) [0.00,4.00] sprt @ 30+0.3 th 3
Total: 14817 W: 2103 L: 1915 D: 10799

LLR: 2.96 (-2.94,2.94) [0.00,4.00] sprt @ 15+0.15 th 7
Total: 10264 W: 1498 L: 1321 D: 7445

Verified that is not a significant regression with a single thread:

LLR: 2.96 (-2.94,2.94) [-4.00,0.00] sprt @ 60+0.6 th 1
Total: 23975 W: 3294 L: 3210 D: 17471

Resolves #575
2016-01-18 22:04:38 +00:00
Guenther DemetzandJoona Kiiski 38adb487ca Distinct iteration paths for Lazy SMP threads
STC 5+0.1, threads 7
LLR: 2.96 (-2.94,2.94) [0.00,5.00]
Total: 6026 W: 1047 L: 901 D: 4078

LTC: 20+0.2, threads 7
LLR: 2.95 (-2.94,2.94) [0.00,5.00]
Total: 19739 W: 2910 L: 2721 D: 14108

STC 5+0.1, threads 20
LLR: 2.95 (-2.94,2.94) [0.00,5.00]
Total: 2493 W: 462 L: 331 D: 1700

LTC 30+0.3, threads 20
ELO: 8.86 +-3.7 (95%) LOS: 100.0%
Total: 8000 W: 1076 L: 872 D: 6052

Bench: 8012530

Resolves #525
2015-12-18 21:59:09 +00:00