Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: stalemate guard

Author: James Long

Date: 13:43:51 11/08/98

Go up one level in this thread


On November 08, 1998 at 15:07:36, Peter Fendrich wrote:

>On November 08, 1998 at 12:15:30, James Long wrote:
>
>>
>>I recently received a game via email that Tristram played
>>against Gromit.  Tristram had 1 queen, 1 rook and 3 pawns
>>vs a lone king, and allowed Gromit a stalemate.  I've
>>tried and tried to reproduce this, but can't seem to get
>>Tris to replay this move.
>>
>>My first thoughts were that I should've implemented that
>>stalemate guard in my endgame eval.  I read about this
>>in the "Chess 4.5" chapter of "Chess Skill in Man and
>>Machine."  Doing this is painfully slow, though.  I ran
>>some suites with it last night, and it's ugly.
>>
>>Seems to me the stalemate should've been caught in the
>>search.
>>
>>Do any of you have a stalemate guard in your evaluation?
>>Has anybody tried this and tossed it out?
>>
>>
>>---
>>James
>
>Stalemates should definitively be discovered in the search. When there are no
>moves and the King is not in check it is stalemate. It costs nearly nothing...

Right, and that's pretty much the conclusion I had come to.  I just
can't figure out why the program gave up the stalemate, because I do
look for this in the search... not easy to debug when you can't reproduce
the error.

>I don't think it's a good idea to detect stalemates in the evaluation function
>if the program uses quiescence search, because then the
>evaluation function almost always is called from such a search and the very rare
>cases of stalemate isn't worth the effort to detect.

After looking at what it did to my test suite results, I don't think
it's a good idea either. :-)  I thought I could ease the blow by
placing the stalemate check in the endgame evaluator, which is only
called when a few pieces are left on the board.  The ugly part is,
you have to generate *all* possible moves and try them until you find
a legal one to see if the position is indeed a stalemate.

But I think you're right... it's not worth the work.  I'm gonna
throw it out.


---
James


>The quiescence path isn't optimal anyway and it's hard to use it for more
>sophisticated logic than what a capture search give you and maybe a few other
>things.
>
>//Peter



This page took 0 seconds to execute

Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700

Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.