Atomic chess engine

#26 #27 #28 I'm slowly making progress on atomic syzygybases:

My plan is that after 6-man bases are generated, then have Stockfish use them; and only then start defining other endgame evaluations such as you discuss. (And it's OK if Stockfish has a nonzero evaluation for a position drawn with perfect play, if the position offers some winning chances. I know that isn't the case in #28 but in other endgames it may be the case.)



Regarding ending position knowledge with pieces more than 6, I think strong human players know some of these positions that are drawish.

Atomic stockfish analyzer is now very strange.

1. Nf3 f6 2. e3

Look at suggested sequence: 2. ... d5 ?! Blunder, best move was e6

(2... e6 3. b3 Nc6 4. Bb5 d5 5. d4 Nh6 6. c3??? Ng4 7. h3 e5??? 8. dxe5 Nh2)

forgot to mark this:
8. dxe5??? Nh2???

all the moves marked with "???" are BLUNDERS.

6. c3 turns ~draw position to "losing in 2".
7. ... e5 is somewhy played instead of 7. ... Nxf2#
8. dxe5: black didn't explode white king, so let's give a second chance to black to play Nxf2# !
8. ... Nh2: again, black doesn't want to blow up white king. Probably white will give to black a third chance...


Is this really fixed?

Look at this game:

1. Nf3 f6 2. e3 e5?? {Blunder...} 3. Ng5 c6?? { (3.74 → 7.20) Blunder. Best move was Bb4. } (3... Bb4 4. c3 fxg5??? 5. Qh5+ g6 6. Qg4 Kf8 7. Qxd7 Nf6 8. f3 Nc6 9. g4 Rd8 10. d3)

after. 4. ... fxg5 in suggested sequence black gets mated in 3.

Thanks for the help fixing this... just now I've found time to start looking into how to duplicate this, only to discover it's the same issue/fix "Reintroduce atomic SEE" I merged earlier this week.

This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.