ChessUSA.com TalkChess.com
Hosted by Your Move Chess & Games
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

WB protocol (and UCI?) extension proposal
Post new topic    TalkChess.com Forum Index -> Computer Chess Club: Programming and Technical Discussions Flat
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Miguel A. Ballicora



Joined: 09 Mar 2006
Posts: 4489
Location: Chicago, Illinois, USA
PostPost subject: Re: WB protocol (and UCI?) extension proposal    Posted: Wed Mar 14, 2012 3:52 pm Reply to topic Reply with quote
hgm wrote:
michiguel wrote:
I think that the exclude/include commands should also be accepted both in force and analyze mode. I figure that many users will set a position, exclude/include, and then go to analyze.


Well, then I think we might as well allow the commands in any mode. Because I can also see applications of exclude during a game, where the GUI could exclude moves that cause forbidden repetitions (i.e. perpetual chases) from the next search. So the engine should clear its list of excluded moves only when moving to another position (i.e. receiving usermove, undo, new, setboard).

Implementation of the feature is for a large part up to the engine. If the move it is now searching is excluded (which does seem a rather usual situation: engine gets a fail high on a non-PV move, starts a re-search with open window, user thinks "Oh no, not that!" and excludes it), the user would probably not be very happy if the engine spent another 15 minutes to finish the search of that move at a large depth. So the choice is between the simple implementation of aborting the search, restarting at d=1 (which you would also have to do whan the PV move gets excluded), or a "selective abort" which forces return from all levels but continues in the root.

I thought about the case where a user would exclude all moves, but I did not foresee a problem there. The engine would simply report a (stale)mate. That doesn't seem to need any special provisions; positions with zero moves could also occur without excluding any moves, and the engine should know how to handle those. Note this situation can only occur when the user excludes the current-best move from a situation where only a single move was left, which should start a new search at d=1.


No problem with that, but I feel it should be specified and documented that there is a chance that all moves will be removed, so the engine should be prepared (i.e. not crash) and behave [insert here whatever it is decided].

Miguel
_________________
http://sites.google.com/site/gaviotachessengine/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Display posts from previous:   
Subject Author Date/Time
WB protocol (and UCI?) extension proposal H.G.Muller Mon Mar 12, 2012 8:52 am
      Re: WB protocol (and UCI?) extension proposal Julien MARCEL Mon Mar 12, 2012 12:18 pm
            Re: WB protocol (and UCI?) extension proposal H.G.Muller Mon Mar 12, 2012 12:59 pm
                  Re: WB protocol (and UCI?) extension proposal Miguel A. Ballicora Mon Mar 12, 2012 2:42 pm
            Re: WB protocol (and UCI?) extension proposal Ferdinand Mosca Mon Mar 12, 2012 3:34 pm
      Re: WB protocol (and UCI?) extension proposal Daniel Shawul Mon Mar 12, 2012 1:12 pm
            Re: WB protocol (and UCI?) extension proposal H.G.Muller Mon Mar 12, 2012 1:21 pm
                  Re: WB protocol (and UCI?) extension proposal Karlo Bala Jr. Mon Mar 12, 2012 8:56 pm
                        Re: WB protocol (and UCI?) extension proposal H.G.Muller Mon Mar 12, 2012 10:11 pm
      Re: WB protocol (and UCI?) extension proposal Ferdinand Mosca Mon Mar 12, 2012 1:46 pm
      Re: WB protocol (and UCI?) extension proposal Miguel A. Ballicora Mon Mar 12, 2012 2:48 pm
            Re: WB protocol (and UCI?) extension proposal H.G.Muller Mon Mar 12, 2012 3:51 pm
                  Re: WB protocol (and UCI?) extension proposal Miguel A. Ballicora Mon Mar 12, 2012 8:01 pm
      Re: WB protocol (and UCI?) extension proposal Evert Glebbeek Tue Mar 13, 2012 5:28 am
            Re: WB protocol (and UCI?) extension proposal H.G.Muller Tue Mar 13, 2012 10:05 am
                  Re: WB protocol (and UCI?) extension proposal Miguel A. Ballicora Tue Mar 13, 2012 4:39 pm
                        Re: WB protocol (and UCI?) extension proposal H.G.Muller Tue Mar 13, 2012 5:24 pm
                              Re: WB protocol (and UCI?) extension proposal Piero Teixeira Tue Mar 13, 2012 11:23 pm
                                    Re: WB protocol (and UCI?) extension proposal H.G.Muller Wed Mar 14, 2012 6:16 am
                              Re: WB protocol (and UCI?) extension proposal Miguel A. Ballicora Wed Mar 14, 2012 6:46 am
                                    Re: WB protocol (and UCI?) extension proposal H.G.Muller Wed Mar 14, 2012 7:47 am
                                          Re: WB protocol (and UCI?) extension proposal Michel Van den Bergh Wed Mar 14, 2012 3:16 pm
                                                Re: WB protocol (and UCI?) extension proposal Miguel A. Ballicora Wed Mar 14, 2012 3:55 pm
                                                Re: WB protocol (and UCI?) extension proposal H.G.Muller Wed Mar 14, 2012 4:17 pm
                                                      Re: WB protocol (and UCI?) extension proposal Michel Van den Bergh Wed Mar 14, 2012 5:30 pm
                                                            Re: WB protocol (and UCI?) extension proposal H.G.Muller Wed Mar 14, 2012 5:42 pm
                                                                  Re: WB protocol (and UCI?) extension proposal Michel Van den Bergh Wed Mar 14, 2012 6:30 pm
                                                                        Re: WB protocol (and UCI?) extension proposal H.G.Muller Wed Mar 14, 2012 7:27 pm
                                                                              Re: WB protocol (and UCI?) extension proposal Michel Van den Bergh Wed Mar 14, 2012 7:35 pm
                                                                                    Re: WB protocol (and UCI?) extension proposal Dadi Jonsson Thu Mar 15, 2012 10:01 am
                                          Re: WB protocol (and UCI?) extension proposal Miguel A. Ballicora Wed Mar 14, 2012 3:52 pm
      Re: WB protocol (and UCI?) extension proposal Ferdinand Mosca Sun Apr 01, 2012 6:41 am
            Re: WB protocol (and UCI?) extension proposal H.G.Muller Sun Apr 01, 2012 9:10 am
                  Re: WB protocol (and UCI?) extension proposal H.G.Muller Mon Apr 02, 2012 10:02 am
                        Re: WB protocol (and UCI?) extension proposal Ferdinand Mosca Mon Apr 02, 2012 11:04 am
                              Re: WB protocol (and UCI?) extension proposal H.G.Muller Mon Apr 02, 2012 3:18 pm
                                    Re: WB protocol (and UCI?) extension proposal Ferdinand Mosca Tue Apr 03, 2012 11:13 am
Post new topic    TalkChess.com Forum Index -> Computer Chess Club: Programming and Technical Discussions

 
Jump to:  
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




Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
Enhanced with Moby Threads