Always scale using pawn contribution #1570
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
…while there. Bench: 5501327
|
Maybe the general case could be scaled with pawns from both colors |
|
Merged via 213166b, congrats! :-) |
|
Yes you're right. It would make perfectly sense to somehow unify scale factor and initiative. This will be a long way. |
joergoster
pushed a commit
to joergoster/Stockfish-old
that referenced
this pull request
May 20, 2018
This is a further step in the long quest for a simple way of determining scale factors for the endgame. Here we remove the artificial restriction in evaluate_scale_factor() based on endgame score. Also SCALE_FACTOR_ONEPAWN can be simplified away. The latter is a small non functional simplification with respect to the version that was testedin the framework, verified on bench with depth 22 for good measure. Passed STC LLR: 2.95 (-2.94,2.94) [-3.00,1.00] Total: 49438 W: 9999 L: 9930 D: 29509 http://tests.stockfishchess.org/tests/view/5ae20c8b0ebc5963175205c8 Passed LTC LLR: 2.96 (-2.94,2.94) [-3.00,1.00] Total: 101445 W: 15113 L: 15110 D: 71222 http://tests.stockfishchess.org/tests/view/5ae2a0560ebc5902a1998986 How to continue from there? Maybe the general case could be scaled with pawns from both colors without losing Elo. If that is the case, then this could be merged somehow with the scaling in evaluate_initiative(), which also uses a additive malus down when the number of pawns in the position goes down. Closes official-stockfish/Stockfish#1570 Bench: 5254862 Conflicts: src/material.cpp
goodkov
pushed a commit
to goodkov/Stockfish
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 21, 2018
This is a further step in the long quest for a simple way of determining scale factors for the endgame. Here we remove the artificial restriction in evaluate_scale_factor() based on endgame score. Also SCALE_FACTOR_ONEPAWN can be simplified away. The latter is a small non functional simplification with respect to the version that was testedin the framework, verified on bench with depth 22 for good measure. Passed STC LLR: 2.95 (-2.94,2.94) [-3.00,1.00] Total: 49438 W: 9999 L: 9930 D: 29509 http://tests.stockfishchess.org/tests/view/5ae20c8b0ebc5963175205c8 Passed LTC LLR: 2.96 (-2.94,2.94) [-3.00,1.00] Total: 101445 W: 15113 L: 15110 D: 71222 http://tests.stockfishchess.org/tests/view/5ae2a0560ebc5902a1998986 How to continue from there? Maybe the general case could be scaled with pawns from both colors without losing Elo. If that is the case, then this could be merged somehow with the scaling in evaluate_initiative(), which also uses a additive malus down when the number of pawns in the position goes down. Closes official-stockfish#1570 Bench: 5254862
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.
Always scale using pawn contribution
This is a further step in the long quest for a simple way of determining
scale factors for the endgame.
Here we remove the artificial restriction in evaluate_scale_factor()
based on endgame score. Also SCALE_FACTOR_ONEPAWN can be simplified
away. The latter is a small non functional simplification with respect
to the version that was testedin the framework, verified on bench with
depth 22 for good measure.
Passed STC
LLR: 2.95 (-2.94,2.94) [-3.00,1.00]
Total: 49438 W: 9999 L: 9930 D: 29509
http://tests.stockfishchess.org/tests/view/5ae20c8b0ebc5963175205c8
Passed LTC
LLR: 2.96 (-2.94,2.94) [-3.00,1.00]
Total: 101445 W: 15113 L: 15110 D: 71222
http://tests.stockfishchess.org/tests/view/5ae2a0560ebc5902a1998986
How to continue from there?
Maybe the general case could be scaled with pawns from both colors
without losing Elo. If that is the case, then this could be merged
somehow with the scaling in evaluate_initiative(), which also uses
a additive malus down when the number of pawns in the position goes
down.
Closes #1570
Bench: 5254862