IvanHoe 0B.01.10 x64 Crashes in certain positions

[Prima]

Thanks Kingliveson. Check your pm.

Ok, Windows builds emailed.

Once the Linux builds are done, everything will be uploaded later today.

Just checked my email but nothing from you. Or maybe you can send them in my pm box?


EDIT: Never mind. On suspecting it may have been placed as spam, I rechecked my email and sure enough, your mail was classified as spam. All taken care of and I downloaded the patched versions.

Thanks Kingliveson. I appreciate it.

Best.

[kingliveson]

IvanHoe999947c (9.47b) has been re-uploaded after patching the bug described on this thread and another here. Nothing more is to be expected, but they are important fixes nevertheless. Thanks again, Prima!

The new archive is found here, and has the following md5sum: 446e12052fa6bac79f0aa3778c97152f

Code: Select all

d4a0c6b32e98640e4e06b2c73d1a5b70  ./Linux/Mode_Analysis/x86-64/IvanHoe999947c
141fb42d84b68a63e22ccac0232b0c2a  ./Linux/Mode_Analysis/x86-32/IvanHoe999947c
bd36dfd5f65838e58b71cd8cd3672f9f  ./Linux/Mode_Game_Play/x86-64/IvanHoe999947c
54ac2c246b9bcf5f2fb863ab02d9f139  ./Linux/Mode_Game_Play/x86-32/IvanHoe999947c
1f52602918e6e7a42a4848c3e29c6dc6  ./Windows/Mode_Analysis/x86-64/IvanHoe999947c.exe
de053a77909515a4cbfde2a45d97a6db  ./Windows/Mode_Analysis/x86-32/IvanHoe999947c.exe
f4c90689c6c8d05d6417f9a3b5b67e05  ./Windows/Mode_Game_Play/x86-64/IvanHoe999947c.exe
f7110dade7557131f032f8d244e784fd  ./Windows/Mode_Game_Play/x86-32/IvanHoe999947c.exe

[kingliveson]

Prima, I didnt forget your last request; will have something for you soon...0B.09.17.

Edit:
I have attached the build...

The result against Critter, both running Linux versions using single core with ponder on, egtb off, 1 minute, hash 128 MB. Error: +/- ~50

1 IvanHoe 0B.09.16 x64 +33/-18/=49
2 Critter 1.2 64-bit SSE4 +18/-33/=49

The match against Houdini was done in a virtual machine using single core with ponder off, egtb off, 1 minute, hash 128 MB. Error +/- ~70

1 IvanHoe 0B.09.16 x64 +14/-14/=22
2 Houdini 1.5a x64 +14/-14/=22


The tests use the this opening suite.

Acknowledgements:
An invaluable resource for any chess engine author is the excellent Chess Programming Wiki.

Without modified publicly released IvanHoe source code, and techniques from open source chess engines Crafty and Stockfish, IvanHoe 0B.09.17 would not nearly be as strong as it is now.

Code: Select all

72c3f6da09f2950aee1668bf7e8406e7  IvanHoe_0B.09.16
98ed71b99d662eaac02b185df79ca09c  IvanHoe_0B.09.16.exe
bf8665a30b4d7326945011e9644f9ca3  IvanHoe_0B.09.17
2c5ce183cffef134b19b9a7c07c42a7b  IvanHoe_0B.09.17.exe

Disclaimer: Actually, it's really not stronger than the default build; the results dont mean anything -- not enough games....

[Prima]

Mercy me! 'Just noticed this. Thank you so much Kingliveson for this "special" version.

[kingliveson]

Mercy me! 'Just noticed this. Thank you so much Kingliveson for this "special" version.

The pleasure is all mine.

I thought the results against Critter (Linux version) was a fluke, but see the screen shot of another test (100 positions) am running with same condition above. Am not sure how the Windows version will perform, as it wasn't thoroughly tested and the modification is a bit different from the Linux version.

Edit:
Final result: +62/-39/=99
Erorr +/- ~35

The results are surprising because http://www.amateurschach.de/ has IvanHoe below Critter 1.2 10 Elo. But again, that's a different kind of test...

[Prima]

Mercy me! 'Just noticed this. Thank you so much Kingliveson for this "special" version.

The pleasure is all mine.

I thought the results against Critter (Linux version) was a fluke, but see the screen shot of another test (100 positions) am running with same condition above. Am not sure how the Windows version will perform, as it wasn't thoroughly tested and the modification is a bit different from the Linux version.

Edit:
Final result: +62/-39/=99
Erorr +/- ~35

The results are surprising because http://www.amateurschach.de/ has IvanHoe below Critter 1.2 10 Elo. But again, that's a different kind of test...

This is a big improvement, Kingliveson. Besides differences in hardware, I'd expect the Windows version to perform like similar to the Linux compile. Looks like IvanHoe 0b.09.17 has higher NPS than Critter.

By the way, your Xboard looks really nice. Same texture colour as mine, except for the piece fonts.

I can't thank you enough.

[kingliveson]

This is a big improvement, Kingliveson. Besides differences in hardware, I'd expect the Windows version to perform like similar to the Linux compile. Looks like IvanHoe 0b.09.17 has higher NPS than Critter.

By the way, your Xboard looks really nice. Same texture colour as mine, except for the piece fonts.

I can't thank you enough.

Am not sure there's really any improvement to be honest. Either way, Windows fixed build 0B.09.1(X) will be released and probably will be the last. Computer chess is bad for your health...

[kingliveson]

I could probably produce a build ~50 Elo gain, but then the source code would have to be released along in keeping with the open-source spirit. The issue is you have those who will commercialize it, which actually I have no problem with, in all sincerity, but rather the blatant lies attached claiming it's their own code with just "ideas" from other sources. It is disheartening and very discouraging.

[Prima]

Am not sure there's really any improvement to be honest. Either way, Windows fixed build 0B.09.1(X) will be released and probably will be the last. Computer chess is bad for your health...

Kingliveson, my apologies for replying late.

I meant to reply earlier but an afternoon nap overtook me. By the time I woke up, it was Friday-sunset. I am inactive on forums (and in anything else) from Friday-sunset to Saturday-sunset; meaning I won't log-in to forums nor post/reply in forums from Friday-sunset to Saturday-sunset. I just rest.

To me, whether the ELO from this special IvanHoe compile is 1ELO below Critter or 10ELO below Critter is an improvement. At least to me. Critter is a good quality engine to be reckoned with. I think you're too modest

I could probably produce a build ~50 Elo gain, but then the source code would have to be released along in keeping with the open-source spirit. The issue is you have those who will commercialize it, which actually I have no problem with, in all sincerity, but rather the blatant lies attached claiming it's their own code with just "ideas" from other sources. It is disheartening and very discouraging.

Personally on this very matter, I would suggest NOT to release your tweaked & ELO-improved code. After all, there are "some" who compile IvanHoe, releases the IvanHoe executive files but won't include "their" tweaked IvanHoe code, which IS public domain.

That said, your other "concern" is what I share and have been stressing too. IF you increase IvanHoe's ELO by 50 and release the executive files along with your improved code, several scenario can be expected:

1. Certain commercial authors will use it and NOT give simple, honest acknowledgment and credit where credit is due. That is intentional vague words are used, if at all acknowledging something. Plus it's not fair for people to pay for something that IS freeware supposedly bundled as commercial, when in fact "the commercial" author directly used freeware codes (not the ubiquitous rudimentary codes) that he did not create from his intellect to add ELO.

2. Those in the category of compiling IvanHoes but refuse to include their personal "tweaked" codes with the executable files WILL use your codes for their personal IvanHoe engines, but releases a buggy IvanHoe (meaning less than 50ELO) to the public. These are the very same compilers who will want your tweaked IvanHoe codes but when they release their IvanHoe compiles to the public, they don't (and never) include THEIR tweaked codes with it. Nor do they post their "bug free" IvanHoes & its tweaked bug-free codes to the public. More like they think they're "smarter" than everyone else.

Sadly, on licenses (GPL, Public Domain) that's supposed to help and encourage exchange of ideas, it's come to this. But it's your decision to make...


Regards,
P

[Peterpan]

hi Prima bugg

I am not sure what you are trying to do here ?! But anyway i will not pay much attention to your suggestions regarding "other" Ivanhoe compilers if i am also being referred to by you.

The only attention i will pay to it is this reply you will see here now.

For your information,with my latest successful "tweaked" version of Ivanhoe compile (which by the way is stable and confirmed stable by reliable testers and myself) also has a source being published.
So even you can go and re-compile it if you are able to do so.I was also the first Ivanhoe compiler who added the TripleBase 6 men bug fix and published it,no,i did not fix it,the decembrists did,and i do not take credit for fixing it.

I am not going to refer here or talk about other Ivanhoe compilers besides myself or i will just be doing the same you are doing now and i won't snoop down to that level of disregard for fellow Ivanhoe compilers,which i have respect for,all of them.

anyway...
After that i released an experimental release and there i did not include the source,for obvious reasons mentioned by you in your above post also and also because it is just an experiment modification (yes this time i actually added some meaningful code ) and many more improvements are being added as we speak.

So i suggest you get your facts straight before making wild accusations and throwing around insults etc... it is not appreciated but certainly does not upset me though;)

Have a nice day and regards
Peterpan