Re: [Scidvspc-devel] Fics score bar / sc_pos analyze

[C H. M. <han...@gm...>]

Hi Steve,

Ideal thing would be for the engine to run in the background and
refine the eval with time (as it goes deeper, like what the analysis
engine flow does). However if multiple games are being observed, and
we try to have multiple instances of the engine running wrt each game
being observed, that could turn out to be too much load.

So instead having a SINGLE local engine running in the background and
inturn sending it

a) a new board position (resulting from latest move wrt a game; if
multiple games are being followed and their evalbar updated using this
mechanism)

b) a latest move (if only one game is being followed, here even
periodic update of the bar should be easily possible if reqd)

and inturn using the eval from the local engine at the end of the
configured short time window, could still give a ok enough rough eval
especially for human games where deep twists/traps that can change the
eval may not be that common.

NOTE: Havent looked at uci and xboard protocols for ages now, however
my vague memory seems to indicate the possibility of both the above
flows in one or the other.

Also rather because engines like stockfish etal will normally reach
much deeper compared to the internal engine (scidlet?) within a given
time window, so making the engine to use, as well as
short-time-window-to-use configurable by the end user could be a
useful thing, with the default config being the internal engine.

On Sat, Jan 11, 2025 at 11:18 AM Steve A <ste...@gm...> wrote:
>
> I've realised we can use the scid's never-used inbuilt chess engine to add a quick score to fics observed games! :) It's currently given a 200 millisecond run before we update the observed board. (Is this optimal?)
>
> But I was of the opinion, ages ago we had a problem with "sc_pos analyze" segfaulting occasionally. I may have fixed it sometime... but am uncertain of it's status. (engine.cpp)
>
> Maybe the problem was only at near mate positions with low piece count.
> So, testing is in order i guess... Hmmm.
>
> Cheers.



-- 
Keep ;-)
HanishKVC