released: micro-Max 4.8w

Discussion of anything and everything relating to chess playing software and machines.

Moderators: Harvey Williamson, bob, hgm

Forum rules
This textbox is used to restore diagrams posted with the [d] tag before the upgrade.
Uri Blass
Posts: 8795
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 11:37 pm
Location: Tel-Aviv Israel

Re: released: micro-Max 4.8w Feature Request

Post by Uri Blass » Fri May 18, 2007 10:04 pm

Dann Corbit wrote:Feature request for the Winboard interface part:
setboard
My guess is that it is impossible with an engine that is so small.

Dann Corbit
Posts: 11622
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 7:57 pm
Location: Redmond, WA USA
Contact:

Re: released: micro-Max 4.8w Feature Request

Post by Dann Corbit » Fri May 18, 2007 10:45 pm

Uri Blass wrote:
Dann Corbit wrote:Feature request for the Winboard interface part:
setboard
My guess is that it is impossible with an engine that is so small.
It already has edit in the interface, so he could just use the FEN, write a parser in the Winboard interface part, and use calls to edit methods

User avatar
hgm
Posts: 25008
Joined: Fri Mar 10, 2006 9:06 am
Location: Amsterdam
Full name: H G Muller
Contact:

Re: released: micro-Max 4.8w

Post by hgm » Sat May 19, 2007 5:52 am

Uri Blass wrote:I wonder what is the reason that micromax4.4 is going to play in
the following tournament and not micromax4.8
http://www.csvn.nl/index.php?lang=en
Actually I do play uMax 4.8 there. The reason that it says different there is that I never informed them of it. I was under the impression that on the registration form I had just entered ' micro-Max', without specifying any version number. But perhaps I remember wrong. When I registered 4.4 was the most recent version, so if I gave a version number I would have given that. I will have them correct it.
Uri Blass wrote: I also wonder what caused you to implement check extensions
because I remember that earlier you were against this idea inspite of the fact that I told you that it is productive for playing strength.
This is true. At some point I discovered, however, that the detrimental effect of the check extension was mainly caused in the end-game, especially at the short time control where I tested. If I only extended in the middle-game (according to the same criterion as where I drop the King-safetety terms and the King starts walking to the center of the board) it did cause a 58% result in self-play, where before it was within 1 sigma of 50%.

I later confirmed that positive effect in a gauntlet of Nunn matches against other opponents. I should add that I could only test meaningfully against these other opponents after having implemented the rep-draw recognition. Before that most improvements were masked because the opponents tricked uMax into a rep-draw as soon as it started winning.

User avatar
hgm
Posts: 25008
Joined: Fri Mar 10, 2006 9:06 am
Location: Amsterdam
Full name: H G Muller
Contact:

Re: released: micro-Max 4.8w Feature Request

Post by hgm » Sat May 19, 2007 6:09 am

Uri Blass wrote:
Dann Corbit wrote:Feature request for the Winboard interface part:
setboard
My guess is that it is impossible with an engine that is so small.
I do not count the length of the Winboard-interface driver as part of the length of the engine. The character counts I report are always for the stand-alone versions.

I see the wWinboard versions mainly as a way to offer a more user-friendly way to experience how the stand-alone version would play. This is not perfect, as the Winboard version manages the search time through the time and otim commands, while the stand-alone version has a hard-wired number of nodes per move to search compiled into it, and starts (and always finishes) iterations as long as this number is not yet reached.

In the future I hope to chance this procedure and write a separate WB2UM (WinBoard to Micro-Max) interface, that connects to the stand-allone versions through a pipe. For this it should be able for the stand-alone versions to understand a command that could set the number of nodes they are allowed to search on a move-by-move basis. This should be possile in an acceptable number of characters, e.g. by using an invalid from-square indicator (e.g. ' t ' ) of the input move as time command, and using the to-square as an indicator for the number of nodes to search.

User avatar
hgm
Posts: 25008
Joined: Fri Mar 10, 2006 9:06 am
Location: Amsterdam
Full name: H G Muller
Contact:

Re: released: micro-Max 4.8w Feature Request

Post by hgm » Sat May 19, 2007 6:19 am

Dann Corbit wrote:It already has edit in the interface, so he could just use the FEN, write a parser in the Winboard interface part, and use calls to edit methods
Well, I have a FEN parser in Joker. (But no setboard either.)

Setboard belongs to the Wiinboard 2 protocol, while my Winboard drivers were written for protocol 1. Can I safely implement it without causing the existing interface no longer to work? Is it simply a matter of echoing "setboard=1" when recieving the "protover" command?

Post Reply