Page 1 of 2
Raid Engines
Posted: Sun Jul 30, 2023 3:06 pm
by Orgz
Raid v2.7i
slightly better than sf 280723. the engine use .exp to save time/to gain advantage in games.
Inside the RaR you will find the Raid binaries, src, Raid test.txt n logo. ALL CREDIT GOES TO THE SF TEAM
https://pixeldrain.com/u/71qRRQwp
Hope you enjoy it.
Re: Raid Engines
Posted: Mon Aug 07, 2023 4:26 am
by Orgz
Raid v2.7ii AssauLT
This version makes v2.7i look like a puppy
bin books can be added manually via the uci-option or you can rename any bin book to Raid1 or Raid2.bin and place it/or them in the same folder as the engine, it will do the rest.
https://pixeldrain.com/u/Wf3NxuvC
hope you enjoy it.
For the people
TR
Re: Raid Engines
Posted: Thu Aug 17, 2023 2:36 am
by Orgz
Re: Raid Engines
Posted: Thu Aug 17, 2023 11:59 am
by Orgz
My apology.
I saw they ran on the pc which i used to compile but on the other one they didn't.
I had a look at the code. Heres a fix
https://pixeldrain.com/u/8zJkUHHT
Re: Raid Engines
Posted: Thu Aug 24, 2023 8:22 am
by Orgz
Am looking for someone who can assist me on confirming my tests of Raid devs. So far i hv crafted 3 Raid betas 1 shows dominance over the two and obviously over v2.73.
By confirming: you test the beta on ur side, NOT BULLETS. 2+2 / 3+2/ 3+1/ 3+3 etc is better
Re: Raid Engines
Posted: Thu Aug 31, 2023 5:36 pm
by Orgz
update Raid v2.73i AssauLT
https://pixeldrain.com/u/cWQVfXjD
Enjoy
Re: Raid Engines
Posted: Thu Aug 31, 2023 11:59 pm
by Orgz
Mr MZ's suggestion:
REMOVED
code:
PRNG rng(1070372);
for (Piece pc : Pieces)
for (Square s = SQ_A1; s <= SQ_H8; ++s)
Zobrist::psq[pc] = rng.rand<Key>();
for (File f = FILE_A; f <= FILE_H; ++f)
Zobrist::enpassant[f] = rng.rand<Key>();
for (int cr = NO_CASTLING; cr <= ANY_CASTLING; ++cr)
Zobrist::castling[cr] = rng.rand<Key>();
Zobrist::side = rng.rand<Key>();
https://pixeldrain.com/u/gzRFyz2v
Re: Raid Engines
Posted: Fri Sep 01, 2023 1:15 am
by massimilianogoi
How are the tests with the latest Stockfish betas?
Orgz wrote: ↑Thu Aug 31, 2023 11:59 pm
Mr MZ's suggestion:
REMOVED
code:
PRNG rng(1070372);
for (Piece pc : Pieces)
for (Square s = SQ_A1; s <= SQ_H8; ++s)
Zobrist::psq[pc] = rng.rand<Key>();
for (File f = FILE_A; f <= FILE_H; ++f)
Zobrist::enpassant[f] = rng.rand<Key>();
for (int cr = NO_CASTLING; cr <= ANY_CASTLING; ++cr)
Zobrist::castling[cr] = rng.rand<Key>();
Zobrist::side = rng.rand<Key>();
https://pixeldrain.com/u/gzRFyz2v
Re: Raid Engines
Posted: Fri Sep 01, 2023 7:02 am
by Orgz
massimilianogoi wrote: ↑Fri Sep 01, 2023 1:15 am
How are the tests with the latest Stockfish betas?
Orgz wrote: ↑Thu Aug 31, 2023 11:59 pm
Mr MZ's suggestion:
REMOVED
code:
PRNG rng(1070372);
for (Piece pc : Pieces)
for (Square s = SQ_A1; s <= SQ_H8; ++s)
Zobrist::psq[pc] = rng.rand<Key>();
for (File f = FILE_A; f <= FILE_H; ++f)
Zobrist::enpassant[f] = rng.rand<Key>();
for (int cr = NO_CASTLING; cr <= ANY_CASTLING; ++cr)
Zobrist::castling[cr] = rng.rand<Key>();
Zobrist::side = rng.rand<Key>();
https://pixeldrain.com/u/gzRFyz2v
You mean comparing the one suggested by MZ and the one that I made?
If yes, there's not much difference
Or against other sf derivatives such as Tactical and the like?
Tests were based on the first one. It's performance is good. A few testers were involved as well. You can test it for yourself and see
Re: Raid Engines
Posted: Fri Sep 01, 2023 10:22 am
by massimilianogoi
I mean Raid vs these Stockfish
https://github.com/official-stockfish/S ... ase%3Atrue
Orgz wrote: ↑Fri Sep 01, 2023 7:02 am
massimilianogoi wrote: ↑Fri Sep 01, 2023 1:15 am
How are the tests with the latest Stockfish betas?
Orgz wrote: ↑Thu Aug 31, 2023 11:59 pm
Mr MZ's suggestion:
REMOVED
code:
PRNG rng(1070372);
for (Piece pc : Pieces)
for (Square s = SQ_A1; s <= SQ_H8; ++s)
Zobrist::psq[pc] = rng.rand<Key>();
for (File f = FILE_A; f <= FILE_H; ++f)
Zobrist::enpassant[f] = rng.rand<Key>();
for (int cr = NO_CASTLING; cr <= ANY_CASTLING; ++cr)
Zobrist::castling[cr] = rng.rand<Key>();
Zobrist::side = rng.rand<Key>();
https://pixeldrain.com/u/gzRFyz2v
You mean comparing the one suggested by MZ and the one that I made?
If yes, there's not much difference
Or against other sf derivatives such as Tactical and the like?
Tests were based on the first one. It's performance is good. A few testers were involved as well. You can test it for yourself and see
