Stockfish Testing Queue

Finished - 4090 tests

15-01-24 sg fix_skill_level diff
LLR: 2.94 (-2.94,2.94) [-3.00,1.00]
Total: 117279 W: 23585 L: 23642 D: 70052
sprt @ 15+0.05 th 1 Verify the skill level fix is no regression in standard ply
15-01-26 sg scale_endgame diff
LLR: -2.97 (-2.94,2.94) [-1.50,4.50]
Total: 17589 W: 3465 L: 3524 D: 10600
sprt @ 15+0.05 th 1 Scale down endgame by 13/16 (Take 2)
15-01-30 sg pawn_attack_threat diff
LLR: 2.95 (-2.94,2.94) [-1.50,4.50]
Total: 7925 W: 1666 L: 1537 D: 4722
sprt @ 15+0.05 th 1 Add bonus for possible safe pawn pushes which attack an enemy piece. Inspired by http://talkchess.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=55142
15-01-30 sg pawn_attack_threat diff
LLR: 2.95 (-2.94,2.94) [0.00,6.00]
Total: 40109 W: 6841 L: 6546 D: 26722
sprt @ 60+0.05 th 1 LTC: Add bonus for possible safe pawn pushes which attack an enemy piece. Inspired by http://talkchess.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=55142
15-01-31 sg pawn_attack_threat2 diff
LLR: 2.95 (-2.94,2.94) [-1.50,4.50]
Total: 14079 W: 2910 L: 2764 D: 8405
sprt @ 15+0.05 th 1 Add bonus for possible safe pawn pushes which attack an enemy piece. Cover more cases by using a doubleAttackedBy array. (Take 2)
15-01-31 sg pawn_attack_threat2 diff
LLR: 2.95 (-2.94,2.94) [0.00,6.00]
Total: 6092 W: 1064 L: 933 D: 4095
sprt @ 60+0.05 th 1 LTC: Add bonus for possible safe pawn pushes which attack an enemy piece. Cover more cases by using a doubleAttackedBy array. (Take 2)
15-01-31 sg pawn_attack_threat2 diff
ELO: -1.07 +-2.0 (95%) LOS: 15.1%
Total: 37089 W: 6061 L: 6175 D: 24853
40000 @ 60+0.05 th 1 Both version of pawn attack threat passed (the second seems better at LTC counting the test run length, but this can misleading). So measure in a direct match which is the better one.
15-02-01 sg spsa_pawn_attack_threat diff
48483/50000 iterations
100000/100000 games played
100000 @ 15+0.05 th 1 Tune parameters of my passed pawn attack threat patch. Use 100000 games because the parameters are completly untuned.
15-02-02 sg tuned_pawn_attack_threa diff
ELO: 3.64 +-2.2 (95%) LOS: 100.0%
Total: 40000 W: 8213 L: 7794 D: 23993
40000 @ 15+0.05 th 1 Measure elo of tuned vs untuned pawn attack threat
15-02-02 sg spsa_pawn_attack_threat diff
38612/40000 iterations
80000/80000 games played
80000 @ 15+0.05 th 1 The last tuning was promising and at least one parameter seems not converged, so try further tuning on top.
15-02-03 sg tuned2_pawn_attack_thre diff
ELO: -0.97 +-2.2 (95%) LOS: 19.3%
Total: 38311 W: 7575 L: 7682 D: 23054
40000 @ 15+0.05 th 1 Measure elo of second tuned vs first tuned pawn attack threat
15-02-03 sg tuned_pawn_attack_threa diff
LLR: -2.95 (-2.94,2.94) [0.00,4.00]
Total: 37488 W: 6213 L: 6247 D: 25028
sprt @ 60+0.05 th 1 My first tuning seems to give the best parameters, so test them now at LTC against current master.
15-02-04 sg pawn_attack_threat3 diff
LLR: -2.97 (-2.94,2.94) [-1.50,4.50]
Total: 14594 W: 2876 L: 2943 D: 8775
sprt @ 15+0.05 th 1 Recognize only attacks on minor pieces (That was the original idea of Ludmil, i extended that in my succesful patch to all pieces).
15-02-04 sg pawn_attack_threat3 diff
LLR: -2.96 (-2.94,2.94) [-1.50,4.50]
Total: 15280 W: 3015 L: 3080 D: 9185
sprt @ 15+0.05 th 1 exclude queens as target
15-02-06 sg pawn_attack_threat3 diff
ELO: 1.34 +-3.0 (95%) LOS: 80.7%
Total: 20000 W: 3989 L: 3912 D: 12099
20000 @ 15+0.05 th 1 Allow queen as defender. The test of sn which allows all pieces as defenders passed STC, but struggles with LTC. So lets measure the effect for each piece type separatly.
15-02-06 sg pawn_attack_threat3 diff
ELO: 0.28 +-3.0 (95%) LOS: 57.1%
Total: 20000 W: 4006 L: 3990 D: 12004
20000 @ 15+0.05 th 1 Allow rook as defender
15-02-06 sg pawn_attack_threat3 diff
ELO: 0.12 +-3.0 (95%) LOS: 53.1%
Total: 20000 W: 3933 L: 3926 D: 12141
20000 @ 15+0.05 th 1 Allow bishop as defender
15-02-06 sg pawn_attack_threat3 diff
ELO: 2.69 +-3.0 (95%) LOS: 95.9%
Total: 20000 W: 4072 L: 3917 D: 12011
20000 @ 15+0.05 th 1 Allow knight as defender
15-02-06 sg pawn_attack_threat3 diff
ELO: 1.73 +-3.1 (95%) LOS: 86.2%
Total: 19246 W: 3921 L: 3825 D: 11500
20000 @ 15+0.05 th 1 Allow king as defender
15-02-07 sg pawn_attack_threat3 diff
ELO: -0.81 +-2.6 (95%) LOS: 27.2%
Total: 27059 W: 5374 L: 5437 D: 16248
30000 @ 15+0.05 th 1 Allow knight, king and queen as defender. Combine the pieces which show some elo gain and measure if this adds up.
15-02-07 sg pawn_attack_threat3 diff
LLR: -2.94 (-2.94,2.94) [-1.50,4.50]
Total: 28215 W: 5739 L: 5767 D: 16709
sprt @ 15+0.05 th 1 Allow knight as defender. Retest with SPRT to check for luck in first run
15-02-07 sg pawn_attack_threat_see diff
LLR: -2.95 (-2.94,2.94) [-1.50,4.50]
Total: 23696 W: 4778 L: 4819 D: 14099
sprt @ 15+0.05 th 1 My current implemetation detects as cheap as possible safe pawn pushes, so that many cases not covered. Try now for the remaining pushes safety calculation with SEE
15-02-08 sg backward_pawn diff
LLR: -2.95 (-2.94,2.94) [-1.50,4.50]
Total: 11104 W: 2202 L: 2278 D: 6624
sprt @ 15+0.05 th 1 double up penalty if backward pawn is stopped by a pawn double attack
15-02-08 sg outposts_double diff
LLR: -2.97 (-2.94,2.94) [-1.50,4.50]
Total: 12099 W: 2426 L: 2500 D: 7173
sprt @ 15+0.05 th 1 Add 50% more bonus if outpost is defended by two pawns.
15-02-08 sg backward_pawn diff
LLR: -2.96 (-2.94,2.94) [-1.50,4.50]
Total: 23324 W: 4585 L: 4628 D: 14111
sprt @ 15+0.05 th 1 Add 50% penalty if backward pawn is stopped by a pawn double attack (Take 2)
15-02-08 sg isolated_pawn diff
LLR: -2.96 (-2.94,2.94) [-1.50,4.50]
Total: 13095 W: 2575 L: 2646 D: 7874
sprt @ 15+0.05 th 1 Fix error: add 50% penalty for isolated pawn which is stopped by a pawn double attack
15-02-11 sg spsa_pawn_attack_threat diff
46633/50000 iterations
99018/100000 games played
100000 @ 15+0.05 th 1 Use different pawn attack threat bonus by piece type. Now tune this parameters, starting at value (20,20) from the current version.
15-02-12 sg pawn_attack_threat4 diff
ELO: 1.21 +-2.8 (95%) LOS: 79.8%
Total: 23278 W: 4746 L: 4665 D: 13867
30000 @ 15+0.05 th 1 Quick measure of the First tuned parameters. Successful any safe pawn push patch is now merged in.
15-02-12 sg spsa_pawn_attack_threat diff
46974/50000 iterations
97604/100000 games played
100000 @ 15+0.05 th 1 The first tuning is done without the any_safe_pawn2 patch. The measurement (now including any_safe_pawn2 patch) gives no significant gain and this two ideas seems strongly interacting as expected. Tuning now is done based on this passed patch. Only my new parameters tuned, not the 2 from the other patch, because we add code so it have to prove first by itself.
15-02-13 sg pawn_attack_threat4 diff
LLR: 2.95 (-2.94,2.94) [-1.50,4.50]
Total: 9307 W: 1916 L: 1784 D: 5607
sprt @ 15+0.05 th 1 Now hopefully the correct test of the tuned parameters. It's just not my day.
15-02-13 sg pawn_attack_threat4 diff
LLR: -2.95 (-2.94,2.94) [0.00,6.00]
Total: 10955 W: 1726 L: 1777 D: 7452
sprt @ 60+0.05 th 1 LTC: Now hopefully the correct test of the tuned parameters. It's just not my day.
15-02-14 sg spsa_pawn_attack_threat diff
48900/50000 iterations
99385/100000 games played
100000 @ 60+0.05 th 1 The tunings on STC gives good results on STC but bad at LTC. So a strong TC dependency seems to exist. So do a last tuning try on LTC.
15-02-18 sg pawn_attack_threat5 diff
ELO: -0.31 +-2.5 (95%) LOS: 40.2%
Total: 30000 W: 5957 L: 5984 D: 18059
30000 @ 15+0.05 th 1 Measure elo for tuned parameters on STC first. I expect no or little gain because parameters tuned on LTC and last tests show a strong TC dependency.
15-02-19 sg pawn_attack_threat5 diff
LLR: -2.97 (-2.94,2.94) [0.00,6.00]
Total: 29837 W: 4936 L: 4897 D: 20004
sprt @ 60+0.05 th 1 As expected the patch seems neutral at STC. Now test on LTC where the paramaters are tuned.
15-02-19 sg asp_window diff
LLR: -2.96 (-2.94,2.94) [0.00,4.00]
Total: 13774 W: 2671 L: 2781 D: 8322
sprt @ 15+0.05 th 1 Increase aspiration window on research by a constant(=4). So this is more like a tuning.
15-02-21 sg queen_contact_check diff
LLR: -2.94 (-2.94,2.94) [-1.50,4.50]
Total: 19077 W: 3747 L: 3801 D: 11529
sprt @ 15+0.05 th 1 if no queen contact checks exists give bonus to queen moves which threats such a check
15-02-26 sg long_chain_with_apex diff
LLR: -2.95 (-2.94,2.94) [-1.50,4.50]
Total: 7542 W: 1473 L: 1559 D: 4510
sprt @ 15+0.05 th 1 Add bonus for inner pawns of a long chain. Based on an idea of Lyudmil Tsvetkov.
15-02-26 sg long_chain_with_apex diff
LLR: -2.96 (-2.94,2.94) [-1.50,4.50]
Total: 67777 W: 13347 L: 13269 D: 41161
sprt @ 15+0.05 th 1 Add bonus for inner pawns of a long chain. Based on an idea of Lyudmil Tsvetkov. (Take 2)
15-02-27 sg long_chain diff
LLR: -2.97 (-2.94,2.94) [-1.50,4.50]
Total: 27535 W: 5377 L: 5409 D: 16749
sprt @ 15+0.05 th 1 Add bonus for inner pawns of a long chain. Based on an idea of Lyudmil Tsvetkov. Include new master and normalize long chain stuff like marco did with apex. This changes the bench because the bonus factor is now applied in another order.
15-03-02 sg long_chain diff
LLR: 2.97 (-2.94,2.94) [-1.50,4.50]
Total: 8225 W: 1708 L: 1578 D: 4939
sprt @ 15+0.05 th 1 Add bonus for inner pawns of a long chain. (even lower bonus)
15-03-03 sg long_chain diff
LLR: -2.96 (-2.94,2.94) [0.00,6.00]
Total: 15665 W: 2575 L: 2603 D: 10487
sprt @ 60+0.05 th 1 LTC: Add bonus for inner pawns of a long chain. (even lower bonus)
15-03-04 sg long_chain diff
LLR: 2.96 (-2.94,2.94) [-1.50,4.50]
Total: 32674 W: 6534 L: 6338 D: 19802
sprt @ 15+0.05 th 1 Add bonus for inner pawns of a long chain. The last value 1/16 passed STC fast but failed LTC. Try now a higher value between 1/8 and 1/16.
15-03-04 sg long_chain diff
LLR: -2.97 (-2.94,2.94) [0.00,6.00]
Total: 25573 W: 4245 L: 4226 D: 17102
sprt @ 60+0.05 th 1 LTC: Add bonus for inner pawns of a long chain. The last value 1/16 passed STC fast but failed LTC. Try now a higher value between 1/8 and 1/16.
15-03-08 sg double_history diff
LLR: 2.96 (-2.94,2.94) [-1.50,4.50]
Total: 4747 W: 1005 L: 885 D: 2857
sprt @ 15+0.05 th 1 Collect double history data and use them for quiet move ordering. Inspired by http://talkchess.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=55535
15-03-08 sg double_history diff
LLR: 2.95 (-2.94,2.94) [0.00,6.00]
Total: 5726 W: 1001 L: 872 D: 3853
sprt @ 60+0.05 th 1 LTC: Collect double history data and use them for quiet move ordering. Inspired by http://talkchess.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=55535
15-03-09 sg double_history diff
ELO: 7.26 +-3.3 (95%) LOS: 100.0%
Total: 14937 W: 2710 L: 2398 D: 9829
20000 @ 15+0.05 th 7 Check for possible regression at multicore. Collect double history data and use them for quiet move ordering. Inspired by http://talkchess.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=55535
15-03-10 sg king_shelter diff
LLR: -2.96 (-2.94,2.94) [-1.50,4.50]
Total: 11233 W: 2181 L: 2257 D: 6795
sprt @ 15+0.05 th 1 Add penalty if king shelter pawns are attackable by enemy pawns
15-03-10 sg king_shelter diff
LLR: -2.95 (-2.94,2.94) [-1.50,4.50]
Total: 7048 W: 1340 L: 1427 D: 4281
sprt @ 15+0.05 th 1 Try the other direction. Reduce penalty if king shelter pawns are not attackable by enemy pawns
15-03-11 sg double_history diff
ELO: 0.31 +-2.2 (95%) LOS: 60.8%
Total: 36695 W: 7330 L: 7297 D: 22068
40000 @ 15+0.05 th 1 I noted a NPS slowdown for the simplified version. Perhaps the result of a combination compiler and hardware. But to go save test the simplified against the original version.
15-03-12 sg update_stats diff
LLR: -2.97 (-2.94,2.94) [-1.50,4.50]
Total: 5175 W: 983 L: 1076 D: 3116
sprt @ 15+0.05 th 1 Allow MOVE_NONE (should help move order at root) and MOVE_NULL (should help move order in null move pruning) as previous move in counter moves and counter history stats update. For this moves as piece always NO_PIECE is used to separate them from other moves like Ra1 and avoid therefore noise. Local tests seems promising.