| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Gary
Joined: 12 Dec 2006 Posts: 339
|
Post subject: Re: evaluate loose pieces Posted: Tue Feb 28, 2012 1:35 pm |
|
|
| mcostalba wrote: |
A possible implementation of your idea that seems an acceptable compromise between speed and accuracy could be:
| Code: |
template<Color Us>
Score evaluate_threats(const Position& pos, EvalInfo& ei) {
const Color Them = (Us == WHITE ? BLACK : WHITE);
Bitboard b, bb;
Score score = SCORE_ZERO;
// Enemy pieces not defended by a pawn and under our attack
Bitboard weakEnemies = pos.pieces(Them)
& ~ei.attackedBy[Them][PAWN]
& ei.attackedBy[Us][0];
if (!weakEnemies)
return SCORE_ZERO;
Bitboard undefended = weakEnemies & ~ei.attackedBy[Them][0];
// Add bonus according to type of attacked enemy piece and to the
// type of attacking piece, from knights to queens. Kings are not
// considered because are already handled in king evaluation.
for (PieceType pt1 = KNIGHT; pt1 < KING; pt1++)
{
b = ei.attackedBy[Us][pt1] & weakEnemies;
if (b)
for (PieceType pt2 = PAWN; pt2 < KING; pt2++)
if (bb = b & pos.pieces(pt2), bb)
score += bb & undefended ? 2 * ThreatBonus[pt1][pt2]
: 1 * ThreatBonus[pt1][pt2];
}
return score;
}
|
|
I gave this idea a try, and it seems that 2x threat bonus is too much. Didn't test too long, but after 150 games, about -40 elo.
Tried a more modest variation of:
| Code: |
score += bb & undefended ? ((5 * ThreatBonus[pt1][pt2]) / 4)
+ : ((3 * ThreatBonus[pt1][pt2]) / 4);
|
And that was:
Score of base vs Stockfish 120227 64bit: 178 - 180 - 635 [0.50] 993
ELO difference: -1
So, no real help . I'll try 1.5x and 0.5x. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
|
| Subject |
Author |
Date/Time |
evaluate loose pieces |
Lucas Braesch |
Sun Feb 26, 2012 5:20 am |
Re: evaluate loose pieces |
Larry Kaufman |
Sun Feb 26, 2012 3:57 pm |
Re: evaluate loose pieces |
Lucas Braesch |
Sun Feb 26, 2012 4:11 pm |
Re: evaluate loose pieces |
Eelco de Groot |
Sun Feb 26, 2012 5:57 pm |
Re: evaluate loose pieces |
Michael Hoffmann |
Sun Feb 26, 2012 6:53 pm |
Re: evaluate loose pieces |
Marco Costalba |
Sun Feb 26, 2012 7:04 pm |
Re: evaluate loose pieces |
Eelco de Groot |
Mon Feb 27, 2012 12:46 am |
Re: evaluate loose pieces |
Marco Costalba |
Mon Feb 27, 2012 7:17 am |
Re: evaluate loose pieces |
Lucas Braesch |
Mon Feb 27, 2012 10:20 am |
Re: evaluate loose pieces |
Sam Hamilton |
Mon Feb 27, 2012 10:23 am |
Re: evaluate loose pieces |
Lucas Braesch |
Mon Feb 27, 2012 1:40 pm |
Re: evaluate loose pieces |
Evert Glebbeek |
Mon Feb 27, 2012 2:34 pm |
Re: evaluate loose pieces |
Marek Kwiatkowski |
Mon Feb 27, 2012 2:58 pm |
Re: evaluate loose pieces |
Eelco de Groot |
Mon Feb 27, 2012 9:45 pm |
Re: evaluate loose pieces |
Gary |
Tue Feb 28, 2012 1:35 pm |
Re: evaluate loose pieces |
Marek Kwiatkowski |
Tue Feb 28, 2012 2:35 pm |
Re: evaluate loose pieces |
Joona Kiiski |
Tue Feb 28, 2012 4:04 pm |
Re: evaluate loose pieces |
Marek Kwiatkowski |
Tue Feb 28, 2012 5:57 pm |
Re: evaluate loose pieces |
Eelco de Groot |
Fri May 25, 2012 11:36 pm |
Re: evaluate loose pieces |
Gary |
Tue Feb 28, 2012 4:04 pm |
Re: evaluate loose pieces |
Lucas Braesch |
Mon Feb 27, 2012 3:57 am |
Re: evaluate loose pieces |
Sam Hamilton |
Sun Feb 26, 2012 7:12 pm |
Re: evaluate loose pieces |
Miguel A. Ballicora |
Sun Feb 26, 2012 5:11 pm |
Re: evaluate loose pieces |
Larry Kaufman |
Sun Feb 26, 2012 5:20 pm |
Re: evaluate loose pieces |
Sam Hamilton |
Sun Feb 26, 2012 6:50 pm |
Re: evaluate loose pieces |
Lucas Braesch |
Mon Feb 27, 2012 3:59 am |
Re: evaluate loose pieces |
Sam Hamilton |
Mon Feb 27, 2012 4:28 am |
Re: evaluate loose pieces |
Ed Schroder |
Mon Feb 27, 2012 11:42 am |
Re: evaluate loose pieces |
Gerd Isenberg |
Sun Feb 26, 2012 7:56 pm |
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|