Stockfish Testing Queue

Pending - 0 tests 0.0 hrs

None

Active - 0 tests

Finished - 630 tests

18-10-21 31m combo_qv4_rpsqt_ver diff
LLR: -2.95 (-2.94,2.94) [0.00,4.00]
Total: 61268 W: 13310 L: 13234 D: 34724
sprt @ 10+0.1 th 1 We have recently had two very promising [0, 4] attempts: Q_value4 by @SFisGOD (LTC 153K and counting, but currently with LLR < -2) and rookpsqt5 by @Kurtbusch (LTC 114K yellow). They might be enough for a green combo by themselves, but I would also like to include @DU-jdto's verification (73K yellow) from June 21, which has also performed well in my recent combo attempts. Hopefully all three are enough to pass.
18-10-20 31m EscapeBishop diff
LLR: -2.96 (-2.94,2.94) [0.00,5.00]
Total: 64411 W: 13952 L: 13770 D: 36689
sprt @ 10+0.1 th 1 So far, penalty is better than bonus and bigger is better. Try increasing to S(15, 0).
18-10-20 31m EscapeBishop^ diff
LLR: -2.96 (-2.94,2.94) [0.00,5.00]
Total: 17194 W: 2701 L: 2757 D: 11736
sprt @ 60+0.6 th 1 LTC for S(20, 0).
18-10-20 31m EscapeBishop diff
LLR: 2.96 (-2.94,2.94) [0.00,5.00]
Total: 7653 W: 1723 L: 1555 D: 4375
sprt @ 10+0.1 th 1 Further increase to S(20, 0).
18-10-20 31m EscapeBishop diff
LLR: -2.97 (-2.94,2.94) [0.00,5.00]
Total: 34541 W: 7487 L: 7450 D: 19604
sprt @ 10+0.1 th 1 S(10, 0) penalty.
18-10-20 31m EscapeBishop^^ diff
LLR: -2.95 (-2.94,2.94) [0.00,5.00]
Total: 10400 W: 2176 L: 2256 D: 5968
sprt @ 10+0.1 th 1 S(10, 0) bonus.
18-10-20 31m EscapeBishop^^^ diff
LLR: -2.96 (-2.94,2.94) [0.00,5.00]
Total: 3782 W: 734 L: 846 D: 2202
sprt @ 10+0.1 th 1 Inspired by a post by Mindbreaker on the forum's suggestions thread. I would like to try the same for rooks and queens, but to avoid too many simultaneous tests will start with just bishops. If our bishop is advanced (rank 4 or greater) and could be attacked by a pawn, S(5, 0) bonus if it can retreat to our rank 1 or 2.
18-10-20 31m EscapeBishop^ diff
LLR: -2.95 (-2.94,2.94) [0.00,5.00]
Total: 3836 W: 771 L: 883 D: 2182
sprt @ 10+0.1 th 1 S(5, 0) penalty if the bishop cannot escape.
18-10-19 31m WeakQueen_undefended diff
LLR: -2.95 (-2.94,2.94) [0.00,5.00]
Total: 21650 W: 4597 L: 4623 D: 12430
sprt @ 10+0.1 th 1 WeakQueen currently considers blocked threats from enemy bishops and rooks. If our queen lacks any defenders, also consider blocked enemy queen attacks.
18-10-18 31m SliderRank3 diff
LLR: -2.96 (-2.94,2.94) [0.00,5.00]
Total: 16960 W: 3596 L: 3645 D: 9719
sprt @ 10+0.1 th 1 My first attempt based on Bryan's analysis of Michael Chaly's posted SF losses and @Kurtbusch's tests. This test differs in three ways: (1) I think it is important to include queens, not just rooks--SF's missed moves span both about equally. (2) It may be important that, as in those games, we have a queen but the opponent does not. Require this condition. (3) Don't require that the piece actually be on rank 3--give bonus for mobility on rank 3 regardless, e.g., if our queen attacks three rank 3 squares remotely, give small bonus anyway.
18-10-18 31m psqt_RQ diff
LLR: -2.96 (-2.94,2.94) [0.00,4.00]
Total: 14083 W: 2989 L: 3098 D: 7996
sprt @ 10+0.1 th 1 I don't think I've modified PSQT before, so I apologize for any errors. Use the +4 to Rook rank 3 that produced @Kurtbusch's 114K STC yellow, but apply the same increase also to Queen.
18-10-18 31m SliderRank3 diff
LLR: -2.95 (-2.94,2.94) [0.00,5.00]
Total: 10411 W: 2199 L: 2279 D: 5933
sprt @ 10+0.1 th 1 Broader scope: do not require that we have a queen, only that the opponent does not.
18-10-18 31m overload_extraQ5 diff
LLR: -2.96 (-2.94,2.94) [0.00,5.00]
Total: 31381 W: 6731 L: 6710 D: 17940
sprt @ 10+0.1 th 1 Use bool(), but double the effect.
18-10-18 31m overload_extraQ5^^ diff
LLR: -2.95 (-2.94,2.94) [0.00,5.00]
Total: 29107 W: 6291 L: 6280 D: 16536
sprt @ 10+0.1 th 1 Queen overload still appears to be a slight gain, even excluding WeakQueen cases. Try a few quick variations on the better-performing (no WQ exclusion) tests. Use more_than_one() rather than bool().
18-10-18 31m overload_extraQ5^ diff
LLR: -2.96 (-2.94,2.94) [0.00,5.00]
Total: 17273 W: 3688 L: 3735 D: 9850
sprt @ 10+0.1 th 1 Use popcount() rather than bool().
18-10-18 31m overload_extraQ4 diff
LLR: -2.96 (-2.94,2.94) [0.00,5.00]
Total: 39595 W: 8589 L: 8527 D: 22479
sprt @ 10+0.1 th 1 Maybe the problem with queen-specific overload is the obvious overlap with WeakQueen (queen-pinned pieces are likely also overload targets). Exclude this overlap.
18-10-18 31m overload_extraQ4 diff
LLR: -2.95 (-2.94,2.94) [0.00,5.00]
Total: 45765 W: 9831 L: 9740 D: 26194
sprt @ 10+0.1 th 1 In light of recent attempts to change queen values and penalties, most successful or nearly successful, retry a simple implementation of queen-specific Overload.
18-10-15 31m NvsR1 diff
LLR: -2.96 (-2.94,2.94) [0.00,5.00]
Total: 40538 W: 6540 L: 6505 D: 27493
sprt @ 60+0.6 th 1 LTC for @Vizvezdenec. Take 1.
18-10-14 31m combo_ver_wq_asp diff
LLR: -2.95 (-2.94,2.94) [0.00,4.00]
Total: 26461 W: 5703 L: 5763 D: 14995
sprt @ 10+0.1 th 1 I am surprised at how poorly the tweak to delta performed--try the opposite change as a sanity check.
18-10-14 31m combo_ver_wq_asp diff
LLR: -2.95 (-2.94,2.94) [0.00,4.00]
Total: 12389 W: 2564 L: 2679 D: 7146
sprt @ 10+0.1 th 1 Of my recent combos that have not passed LTC, the best STC so far is combo_ver_wq (100K yellow). Attempt to also revive this small tweak by @candirufish, which despite its small size produced a 71K LTC yellow on May 27. Perhaps this will be enough to convert this combo into a passing patch.
18-10-13 31m combo_cp_ver_wq diff
LLR: -2.95 (-2.94,2.94) [0.00,4.00]
Total: 26157 W: 5662 L: 5723 D: 14772
sprt @ 10+0.1 th 1 It appears that the top and uh tweaks no longer perform well. Try combining cp, wq, and ver, since each individual pair had a positive score (if I recall correctly).
18-10-13 31m combo_uh_ver diff
LLR: -2.95 (-2.94,2.94) [0.00,4.00]
Total: 30404 W: 6494 L: 6539 D: 17371
sprt @ 10+0.1 th 1 Revive sg's update_history (June 3, 73K LTC yellow). Combo with @DU-jdto's 73K yellow mentioned previously.
18-10-13 31m combo_uh_wq diff
LLR: -2.96 (-2.94,2.94) [0.00,4.00]
Total: 18906 W: 4041 L: 4131 D: 10734
sprt @ 10+0.1 th 1 Revive sg's update_history (June 3, 73K LTC yellow). Combo with @SFisGOD's 66K yellow mentioned previously.
18-10-13 31m combo_uh_cp diff
LLR: -2.96 (-2.94,2.94) [0.00,4.00]
Total: 13518 W: 2869 L: 2980 D: 7669
sprt @ 10+0.1 th 1 Revive sg's update_history (June 3, 73K LTC yellow). Combo with sg's 102K yellow mentioned previously.
18-10-13 31m combo_top_ver diff
LLR: -2.94 (-2.94,2.94) [0.00,4.00]
Total: 33496 W: 7148 L: 7181 D: 19167
sprt @ 10+0.1 th 1 Revive my own tweak_threatOnPawn^^ (June 12, LTC 104K yellow). Combo with @DU-jdto's 73K yellow mentioned previously.
18-10-13 31m combo_top_cp diff
LLR: -2.96 (-2.94,2.94) [0.00,4.00]
Total: 27179 W: 5795 L: 5853 D: 15531
sprt @ 10+0.1 th 1 Revive my own tweak_threatOnPawn^^ (June 12, LTC 104K yellow). Combo with sg's 102K yellow mentioned previously.
18-10-13 31m combo_top_wq diff
LLR: -2.95 (-2.94,2.94) [0.00,4.00]
Total: 21020 W: 4401 L: 4483 D: 12136
sprt @ 10+0.1 th 1 Revive my own tweak_threatOnPawn^^ (June 12, LTC 104K yellow). Combo with @SFisGOD's 66K yellow mentioned previously.
18-10-13 31m combo_ver_wq diff
LLR: -2.96 (-2.94,2.94) [0.00,4.00]
Total: 46525 W: 7449 L: 7458 D: 31618
sprt @ 60+0.6 th 1 The STC has already outperformed the one that led to my recent successful speculative LTC. Therefore, before taking any further steps, run a LTC. (I am submitting this now because I probably will not be available when the STC finishes.) Please raise to normal throughput (1000) from the reduced, speculative LTC throughput (166) if the STC passes.
18-10-13 31m combo_ver_wq diff
LLR: -2.95 (-2.94,2.94) [0.00,4.00]
Total: 100567 W: 21521 L: 21296 D: 57750
sprt @ 10+0.1 th 1 I went back to June 21 and found another seemingly unmerged potential combo candidate, @DU-jdto's verification (73K yellow). Combo with @SFisGOD's 66K yellow mentioned previously.
18-10-13 31m combo_ver_cp diff
LLR: -2.95 (-2.94,2.94) [0.00,4.00]
Total: 49404 W: 10555 L: 10527 D: 28322
sprt @ 10+0.1 th 1 I went back to June 21 and found another seemingly unmerged potential combo candidate, @DU-jdto's verification (73K yellow). Combo with sg's 102K yellow mentioned previously.
18-10-13 31m combo_cp_wq diff
LLR: -2.95 (-2.94,2.94) [0.00,4.00]
Total: 57564 W: 12330 L: 12270 D: 32964
sprt @ 10+0.1 th 1 Looking back through long yellow LTC [0, 4] runs, I think we missed an opportunity in sg's connected_pawns from August 15 (102K yellow). I intend to watch carefully for another promising [0, 4] for a combo. Try @SFisGOD's recent 66K LTC yellow, weakQueen5.
18-10-13 31m qsFut^^ diff
LLR: -2.95 (-2.94,2.94) [0.00,5.00]
Total: 42126 W: 6880 L: 6837 D: 28409
sprt @ 60+0.6 th 1 LTC for @vondele. Take 5, param 9500.
18-10-11 31m BsafeCh1 diff
LLR: -2.95 (-2.94,2.94) [0.00,5.00]
Total: 17584 W: 2799 L: 2853 D: 11932
sprt @ 60+0.6 th 1 I'm curious to see how this very promising STC (108K yellow) from @Vizvezdenec scales, and the framework is completely empty. Speculative LTC, low throughput (166).
18-10-11 31m QsafeChQ6 diff
LLR: -2.95 (-2.94,2.94) [0.00,5.00]
Total: 23612 W: 3806 L: 3836 D: 15970
sprt @ 60+0.6 th 1 LTC for @Vizvezdenec: Take 6.
18-10-09 31m combo_TOQ4_pss diff
LLR: 2.95 (-2.94,2.94) [0.00,4.00]
Total: 137198 W: 22351 L: 21772 D: 93075
sprt @ 60+0.6 th 1 Speculative LTC for the combo. I am not dissuaded by the long yellow (83K) STC, because I chose pss specifically for its LTC performance. Low throughput (166).
18-10-09 31m combo_TOQ4_pss diff
LLR: -2.96 (-2.94,2.94) [0.00,4.00]
Total: 83913 W: 17986 L: 17825 D: 48102
sprt @ 10+0.1 th 1 Combo my 88K-and-counting LTC tweak with a 113K LTC yellow by @jdonald from August 29, pss. (Can I combo all three? I thought this wasn't allowed, but I think I've seen it done before...)
18-10-09 31m combo_TOQ4_PF diff
LLR: -2.96 (-2.94,2.94) [0.00,4.00]
Total: 27592 W: 5823 L: 5880 D: 15889
sprt @ 10+0.1 th 1 Combo my 88K-and-counting LTC tweak with a 145K LTC yellow by @snicolet from August 18, pawnless_flank6.
18-10-09 31m tweak_threatOnQueen4 diff
LLR: -2.95 (-2.94,2.94) [0.00,4.00]
Total: 29502 W: 6252 L: 6301 D: 16949
sprt @ 10+0.1 th 1 Double effect (+30). It's possible that not many approvers will available if/when the +15 LTC fails, so I am submitting this now instead. I intend to run this at priority 0 (not the current -1) if the LTC fails and cancel this test otherwise.
18-10-08 31m tweak_threatOnQueen4 diff
LLR: 2.95 (-2.94,2.94) [0.00,4.00]
Total: 38142 W: 8322 L: 8011 D: 21809
sprt @ 10+0.1 th 1 Removing immediate threats against the queen changed my 103K yellow to a 20K red. Check to see if we can't gain Elo by just adding a roughly equivalent amount, 15, to the middlegame components of ThreatByMinor[QUEEN] and ThreatByRook[QUEEN].
18-10-08 31m TrappedQueenRisk^ diff
LLR: -2.94 (-2.94,2.94) [0.00,5.00]
Total: 32963 W: 7033 L: 7004 D: 18926
sprt @ 10+0.1 th 1 Another tweak of the 103K yellow. This was a middlegame-only bonus; add an endgame component of equal value.
18-10-08 31m TrappedQueenRisk diff
LLR: -2.96 (-2.94,2.94) [0.00,5.00]
Total: 13417 W: 2813 L: 2879 D: 7725
sprt @ 10+0.1 th 1 Another tweak of the 103K yellow. This was a middlegame-only bonus; add an endgame component half the size of the middlegame one.
18-10-08 31m TrappedQueenRisk diff
LLR: -2.95 (-2.94,2.94) [0.00,5.00]
Total: 20883 W: 4501 L: 4530 D: 11852
sprt @ 10+0.1 th 1 Tweak of the 103K yellow. I've been including the square the queen currently occupies as "safe", but perhaps I shouldn't--the risk of being trapped is much more about the number of safe squares to move to, regardless of whether the current square is "safe" for now. Exclude it here (remove "| s").
18-10-08 31m TrappedQueenRisk^^^^ diff
LLR: -2.95 (-2.94,2.94) [0.00,5.00]
Total: 39030 W: 6326 L: 6296 D: 26408
sprt @ 60+0.6 th 1 I might be able to turn the 103K yellow (estimated +1.62 Elo) green with a tuning run or more tweaks, but there's no point if it doesn't scale. Therefore, I would like to jump straight to speculative LTC to at least see if there's anything here (especially since the framework is empty). Low throughput (166).
18-10-08 31m TrappedQueenRisk diff
LLR: -2.95 (-2.94,2.94) [0.00,5.00]
Total: 103794 W: 22327 L: 21956 D: 59511
sprt @ 10+0.1 th 1 Surprised that the larger effect seems better so far--increase further to gather more data.
18-10-08 31m TrappedQueenRisk diff
LLR: -2.96 (-2.94,2.94) [0.00,5.00]
Total: 27847 W: 5962 L: 5958 D: 15927
sprt @ 10+0.1 th 1 75, 25. (In other words: S(75, 0) for no safe mobility, S(50, 0) for one safe square, S(25, 0) for two, and no bonus for three or more.)
18-10-08 31m TrappedQueenRisk^ diff
LLR: -2.95 (-2.94,2.94) [0.00,5.00]
Total: 14516 W: 3080 L: 3140 D: 8296
sprt @ 10+0.1 th 1 Parameters 45, 15 are on the cusp of passing (-1 < LLR < 0 after 71K games and counting); so far bigger is better. Keep going. 60, 20.
18-10-08 31m TrappedQueenRisk diff
LLR: -2.96 (-2.94,2.94) [0.00,5.00]
Total: 12552 W: 2640 L: 2710 D: 7202
sprt @ 10+0.1 th 1 Narrower than the neutral version. S(20, 0) for no safe mobility, S(10, 0) for one safe square, no bonus if two or more safe squares.
18-10-08 31m TrappedQueenRisk diff
LLR: -2.97 (-2.94,2.94) [0.00,5.00]
Total: 9103 W: 1891 L: 1978 D: 5234
sprt @ 10+0.1 th 1 Broader than the neutral version. S(40, 0) for no safe mobility, S(30, 0) for one safe square, S(20, 0) for two, S(10, 0) for three, no bonus for four or more.
18-10-08 31m TrappedQueenRisk^ diff
LLR: -2.95 (-2.94,2.94) [0.00,5.00]
Total: 22701 W: 4900 L: 4920 D: 12881
sprt @ 10+0.1 th 1 An initial attempt based on Bryan's comments and suggestions from CCCC Bonus Game 10. Check whether the enemy queen is on our side of the board and unable to immediately trade for our own. If so, count the "safe" squares it attacks/occupies (excluding its own friendly pieces). Define "safe" to be squares that we do not attack, or squares we attack only with a queen and they defend with a second piece. If fewer than three safe squares, give us a bonus. Start with S(30, 0) for no safe mobility and reduce by S(10, 0) for each safe square (modeled on TrappedRook penalty).
18-10-08 31m TrappedQueenRisk diff
LLR: -2.95 (-2.94,2.94) [0.00,5.00]
Total: 5771 W: 1158 L: 1260 D: 3353
sprt @ 10+0.1 th 1 Half effect. S(15, 0) for no safe mobility, S(10, 0) for one safe square, S(5, 0) for two safe squares, no bonus otherwise.