Winboard Forum

Hello Chest friends,

after I discovered a small bug in Chest last week, which does _not_ produce
any wrong results but can considerably increase the solution time under very
rare conditions, Heiner Marxen has of course found this error immediately
and fixed it within one day.

For that reason there?s now a new version available, which at the same time
includes a few new features and improvements in ChestUCI, which came to my mind
since the last release - sorry, but it seems I don?t run out of ideas ...

Here a short overview:

- improvement in ?RetroAnalysis?: the start parameters are now calculated
from the previous move sequence of the solution variant
- new option ?RetroOptions? allows detailled adjustment of different methods
used for retro-analyzing (that?s only for experts!)
- new mode ?SearchMode=DatabaseAnalysis? is a simple test, if new positions
(e.g. from EPD/PGN-files) already exist in the database ?ChestUCI.epd?
(maybe I?ll extend this function in the future!?)
- changes for the database access: the ChestUCI database is now read into
memory only once (at program start), all further actions are done with
this copy in memory
- fixed two small problems in ChestUCI and WinChest

And last but not least my small mate-database ?ChestUCI.epd? already contains
almost 1400 mate puzzles, and all special parameter are fully optimized now.

Download of the new version 4.1 as usual under:
http://www.uciengines.de/UCI-Engines/Chest/chest.html

Best regards,
Franz.

Hello Franz,

Thank you for the new version, but about ChestUCI.epd, number 1035 and 1038 are the same and the parameters for number 1112: 5r2/1br1qkpQ/2np2p1/p3p1P1/1pPbP3/1P1P4/P2B2K1/3B2NR w - - bm #19; 01:47 @ C0/R-5/K3/P6/X23;

Best,
Ignacio.

F.Huber wrote:Hello Chest friends,

after I discovered a small bug in Chest last week, which does _not_ produce
any wrong results but can considerably increase the solution time under very
rare conditions, Heiner Marxen has of course found this error immediately
and fixed it within one day.

For that reason there?s now a new version available, which at the same time
includes a few new features and improvements in ChestUCI, which came to my mind
since the last release - sorry, but it seems I don?t run out of ideas ...

Here a short overview:

- improvement in ?RetroAnalysis?: the start parameters are now calculated
from the previous move sequence of the solution variant
- new option ?RetroOptions? allows detailled adjustment of different methods
used for retro-analyzing (that?s only for experts!)
- new mode ?SearchMode=DatabaseAnalysis? is a simple test, if new positions
(e.g. from EPD/PGN-files) already exist in the database ?ChestUCI.epd?
(maybe I?ll extend this function in the future!?)
- changes for the database access: the ChestUCI database is now read into
memory only once (at program start), all further actions are done with
this copy in memory
- fixed two small problems in ChestUCI and WinChest

And last but not least my small mate-database ?ChestUCI.epd? already contains
almost 1400 mate puzzles, and all special parameter are fully optimized now.

Download of the new version 4.1 as usual under:
http://www.uciengines.de/UCI-Engines/Chest/chest.html

Best regards,
Franz.

Hello Franz,

THANKS!

Hello Ignacio,

Ignacio Santos wrote:Thank you for the new version, but about ChestUCI.epd, number 1035 and 1038 are the same and the parameters for number 1112: 5r2/1br1qkpQ/2np2p1/p3p1P1/1pPbP3/1P1P4/P2B2K1/3B2NR w - - bm #19; 01:47 @ C0/R-5/K3/P6/X23;

well, 1035 and 1038 are not exactly the same - the first one has an ep-field, the second not. That?s also the reason why my own utility didn?t find this (not completely) duplicated position - but of course I?ll remove the 2nd line (I?m sure it will not even be solvable without this ep-field).

And for your #19 parameters:
01:47 at your computer could take too long on mine, that might be the reason for not having added those parameters in my database. There are a few problems in my file, where I actually know the special parameters (from Martin or you), but didn?t include it, because I?m not able to solve it in a reasonable time!
(but I?ll try this #19 ...)

Many thanks for these hints,
Franz.