Jeroen wrote:3. End eval above +0.30, or -0.30 and lower
What engine provides this eval? Because in my analysis of correspondence games, for example, I find a lot of out of book positions that Stockfish claims they're equal, setting scores of <+0.10 or >-0.10, you may think those positions are drawish and should be avoided in such a book.
I wrote this in the Readme-file and on my website: the eval is from Komodo 11.2.2, 60“ per move, 3 cores (on a Quadcore), 2 GB Hash. Contempt=0.
But mention, that a simple one-minute analysis of the endposition of an opening is good for deleting very bad positions. But it is not the “truth“ about that opening-line, only a hint/suggestion. One or two moves later, the eval can be complete different. Thats the reason, why the FEOBOS-project will fail, by the way.
pohl4711 wrote:I wrote this in the Readme-file and on my website: the eval is from Komodo 11.2.2, 60“ per move, 3 cores (on a Quadcore), 2 GB Hash. Contempt=0.
I wonder what would Houdini would say about such positions? There might be a way to include in the book false positives.
pohl4711 wrote:But mention, that a simple one-minute analysis of the endposition of an opening is good for deleting very bad positions. But it is not the “truth“ about that opening-line, only a hint/suggestion. One or two moves later, the eval can be complete different.
True. I reckon that the games won at the highest levels of correnspondence chess are "just" people that in private have found positions where one side has a great advantage but all engines show evals close to 0.00, so a player following them is being lead to its demise.
a simple one-minute analysis of the endposition of an opening is good for deleting very bad positions. But it is not the “truth“ about that opening-line, only a hint/suggestion. One or two moves later, the eval can be complete different. Thats the reason, why the FEOBOS-project will fail, by the way.
Agreed. Just look at the King's Indian, where engines often give a clear advantage for white. Only analysing much deeper will reveil that many of those positions are actually very well playable and in some cases even dangerous for white, if he doesn't anticipate black's counter chances.
Short analysis of such positions are useless, no matter how many engines you use.
is the PGN for the smaller book available?
If so, I can create a ChessGUI book from it.
Graham.
There is only one book included (for three GUIs) - there is no smaller (?) or bigger book. The book is based on 25000 lines and the PGN-file for it, is SALC_V5_hc_10m.pgn
Then there are two testsets in the testsets-folder, one with 500 positions and one with 5000 positions/lines. Both as PGN and EPD. It would be possible to create a book out of the 5000 lines file, but I think, that would be too small for a opening book.
If you create a book out of the SALC_V5_hc_10m.pgn file for ChessGUI, then write a PM to me or contact me over my website and then I will send you my email and you can send me the ChessGUI book. And I will add it to the SALC V5 package. That would be cool.
Regards - Stefan (SPCC)
Hi Stefan - the ChessGUI book creation utility seems to have problems with the pgn. I'll contact Matthias.
Graham Banks wrote:
Hi Stefan - the ChessGUI book creation utility seems to have problems with the pgn. I'll contact Matthias.
Strange. The pgn-file is filtered out of the BigDatabase of Chessbase and it looks quite "normal". Fritz, Arena, Shredder have no problems to read it and make a book out of it. But I have never used ChessGUI - so I can not give any advice - sorry.
All lines in the pgn look like this (first entry):
Graham Banks wrote:
Hi Stefan - the ChessGUI book creation utility seems to have problems with the pgn. I'll contact Matthias.
Strange. The pgn-file is filtered out of the BigDatabase of Chessbase and it looks quite "normal". Fritz, Arena, Shredder have no problems to read it and make a book out of it. But I have never used ChessGUI - so I can not give any advice - sorry.
All lines in the pgn look like this (first entry):
Graham Banks wrote:
Hi Stefan - the ChessGUI book creation utility seems to have problems with the pgn. I'll contact Matthias.
Strange. The pgn-file is filtered out of the BigDatabase of Chessbase and it looks quite "normal". Fritz, Arena, Shredder have no problems to read it and make a book out of it. But I have never used ChessGUI - so I can not give any advice - sorry.
All lines in the pgn look like this (first entry):
I suspect that it's this line in each game that is non-standard.
Sorry, but that TAG is standard.
Look here: http://www.saremba.de/chessgml/standard ... mplete.htm
(Point 9.9.1):
9.9.1: Tag: Annotator
This tag uses a name or names in the format of the player name tags; this identifies the annotator or annotators of the game.
The tag may be standard, but having square brackets inside the tag values is likely not, and in this particular case, does not follow the "format of the player name tags."
zenpawn wrote:The tag may be standard, but having square brackets inside the tag values is likely not, and in this particular case, does not follow the "format of the player name tags."
I doubt that. To avoid problems like that, the text in the Tag starts and ends with “
And no other GUI has problems, reading my pgn-files: Fritz, Shredder, Arena, LittleBlitzerGUI.
But it should be no problem, to use a text-editor and do a search and replace operation:
Replace filter=[-60/60] with filter=(-60/60) or with <nothing> and try out, if ChessGUI can read this.
Last edited by pohl4711 on Sun Feb 11, 2018 11:03 pm, edited 1 time in total.
P.S. - I understand that's the purpose of double quotes, but still, I've seen other scripts choke on brackets within the value, and they are, after all, not specifically allowed in the description of the player name tags.
