Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Fruit - Crafty ... finished or not?

Author: Robert Hyatt

Date: 17:22:59 08/18/05

Go up one level in this thread


On August 18, 2005 at 18:56:57, Uri Blass wrote:

>On August 18, 2005 at 17:44:03, Robert Hyatt wrote:
>
>>On August 18, 2005 at 16:03:31, Vincent Lejeune wrote:
>>
>>>On August 18, 2005 at 14:09:08, Robert Hyatt wrote:
>>>...
>>>> The Sjeng game was simply something overlooked
>>>>months ago that was easy to fix.  This game had a book problem, but even after
>>>>the g5, I wonder if Crafty could have played it better.  I'm looking now...
>>>
>>>Could you give more informations about this "old bug", please ?
>>
>>
>>Yes.  Somewhere way back in the 19's, I removed the last bit of "root
>>pre-processing" code.  One of the pieces was a bit of code that initialized the
>>pawn piece/square table from one of three different sources, depending on
>>whether the games was in the opening, middle-game or endgame phases.  Somehow I
>>removed the preprocessing piece, but never pre-initialized the piece square
>>table to slightly encourage pawn advances in general.  As a result, there was
>>_zero_ incentive unless it was pushing a passed pawn, or making a passed pawn.
>>If you look at the Sjeng ending, it was a dead drawn position, but crafty just
>>sat back and let Sjeng advance the pawns until you reach one of those positions
>>where black can then make a passed pawn and it is closer to promotion than
>>white's resulting passer.  After initializing (by hand) the pawn piece-square
>>table to values similar to 19.0, I replayed the game and Crafty varied so
>>significantly I decided to play a lot of test games to see if it was "better" or
>>"worse" before the changes.  It was worse.  :)  So I left the changes in since
>>they had effectively been tested for several years prior to their unintentional
>>removal...
>>
>>Crafty version 20.0 is going to see the start of a major revision of the eval
>>code to get it cleaned up.  Too much overlap, and interaction.  For example,
>>blockading a passed pawn.  I do it in one place, then give less of a bonus for a
>>rook behind a blockaded passer somewhere else, which is duplicated work that
>>could be avoided.  Probably lots of unintended side-effects scattered around all
>>over so it is about time to re-do this and clean things up completely...
>
>
>If I understand you correctly you say that Crafty after the game against Sjeng
>is without the bug of not advancing pawns and probably better than Crafty before
>the game against Sjeng.
>
>Do you think that removing the last bit of the root pre-processing" code may be
>the reason that Crafty19.17 seems to be weaker than older versions?
>
>Uri


that will take some "diff'ing" to see where it happened..  I'll look..



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.