Yes, that's much more like it.. Bd2, Nh2->g4->f6… with enough depth the king safety terms guide SF into better manoeuvring.zullil wrote: 14. O-O makes my point. Here's what SF "plans" after a real search:Code: Select all
info depth 43 seldepth 55 multipv 1 score cp 24 nodes 15156824762 nps 21011107 hashfull 999 tbhits 0 time 721372 pv e2c2 c6a7 b5e2 b7a6 f3h2 a6e2 c2e2 c7c5 h2g4 a7c6 g4f6 e7f6 g5f6 c8c7 a1c1 c7d7 c1a1 d7c7 e1g1 c6e5 d4e5 c7e5 e2f3 e5f6 f3f6 h5f6 f1e1 f8e8 a1d1 f6h5 e3h6 h5g7 h6g5 g7h5 b3a1 h8g7 a1c2 f7f6 g5d2 a8d8 g1g2 e6e5 c2a3 g7f7 a3b5 h5g7 b5c7 e8e7
It's not an easy problem to solve, though. Test at much longer time controls and you no longer have statistical rigour - the odds of coding a patch to address something specific you have seen and never knowing it had a bad effect overall increase.
If many more volunteers contributed CPU time to fish test (or a similar effort) the story might be different. Imagine if the framework had 20,000 cpus at its disposal. You could run a SPRT at TCEC controls in a day! Or at least you could if not for the fact the draw rate goes up a lot… more sensibly you could use 15 minutes per game instead of 15 seconds. Would require a huge recruitment drive...