Analysis improvements

Hi folks,

I've spent the last week working on the computer analysis. The benefits are the following:

- analysis now goes all the way to the last move played
- computer now shows complete variations, with evaluation before and after the variations
- improved display of inacurracies, mistakes and blunders
- improved chart labels
- complete variations and computer comments in exportable PGN

See an example: lichess.org/analyse/rc7l3n66

Old analysis have been kept unchanged, but you are given the choice to request a new analysis to replace them.

I want to say I like it, but...

The window on the right-hand side looks really cluttered now!

I think it would be better if we had a vertical display like before, with buttons next to inaccurate moves to expand and see possible moves (brown).

I also don't think the grey text is necessary, the '??' and similar notation are well recognised. Even if you are not familiar with it, you can probably guess what they mean.

Enough dickishness! The little table at the bottom looks fantastic. I wonder where 'Good' and 'Brilliant' moves went? :P

The improved PGN export is brilliant too. Clearly, with the normal brackets '()' you have thought about how chess programs, such as the chess.com board editor at http://www.chess.com/analysis-board-editor, interpret them. Namely, it allows you to jump between real and suggested moves.

Amazing work overall! Keep it up. :D

Thanks for your comments (and the new greek translation).

The right panel does look cluttered compared to the previous version.
Thing is, I don't have full control on it. I use the pgn4web library for the analysis: http://pgn4web.casaschi.net/ and its normal behavior is to pile up the moves without structure (example: http://pgn4web.casaschi.net/demo.html)

Previously, I was hacking pgn4web output and tricking it into showing the moves in a table. That's no longer possible when adding the variations. Or... is it? Well maybe, but it would be a hell of a hack. I'll think about it anyway.

More importantly, I think players used to pgn viewers won't be too scared by the current moves display. This is the way it works on other sites.

The grey text may not be necessary, but I figured it gives the moves text some "air". Only having the symbols and evaluations (-8.64) was looking quite heavy:

O-O 10.O-O-O?! (-0.48) Inaccuracy. Best was O-O. [10.O-O Be3 11.Qe3 Qe7 12.Be6 Qe6 13.a3 a6 14.Rfe1 Rfe8 (0.02)]

compared to

O-O 10.O-O-O?! (-0.48) [10.O-O Be3 11.Qe3 Qe7 12.Be6 Qe6 13.a3 a6 14.Rfe1 Rfe8 (0.02)]

No strong opinion about that either, tho. I'm just pushing a first working version. Things can change.

Good and brilliant moves will take more work. I have an idea to detect them. Basically, if a move starts looking much better when analysis reaches a certain depth, then maybe we can consider it a good or brilliant move.

Why not take a cue from ChessTempo and structure it like this?

Just some food for thought. The current view is definitely a clutter. But I can see how having a table, then a list of text followed by another table can be difficult to format from a programming point of view. But this is how I think the table should appear:

The two cases are either black makes a wrong move, or white makes a wrong move.

If white:

1. White Move [?, ?!, ??] <-In table format
(eval) best move was (White Move) [Correct Line] <-In PGN format
1.. Played Continuation <-In table format
2. White Move, Black Move <-In table format

If black made the error:

1. White Move, Black Move [?, ?!, ??] <-In table format
(eval) best move was (Black Move) [Correct Line] <-In PGN format
2. Played continuation <-In table format

If that makes any sense.

the main difference I see with this screenshot is that there is a line break between the move and the variation.

The table thingy makes sense, but you should see the HTML pgn4web gives. It's awful. Not structured at all, just flat spans. It will require a lot of parsing and tweaks on the client side to make it the way we want it.

i think the right window looks way better now. more like, uh i don't know, chess annotations? looks great thib keep up the good work!

Dang, that sucks. A question, weren't you already using pgn4web? I think it was version 1 though.

I think a chesstempo-like interface (I'm pretty sure they use the same library) is a good first step (save for that frame being unacceptably large), the most ideal solution would be expanding every time there are 'potential' moves to see.

As an example, say move 8. Qh4 was an inaccuracy. When you are ON that move in the PGN player, then a suggested series of moves is displayed.
Or, perhaps, you can click on a little + next to individual moves and expand or collapse a suggested move series.

In a case like that, having the grey part would be most excellent.

Anyway, the fact a lot of chess engines present it like this does not make it good or pretty. That's what Lichess set out to improve isn't it? :D

Salut tout le monde !

Merci Thibault, vraiment, pour tout le travail que tu fais pour lichess.

J'apprécie réellement les nouveaux outils d'analyses, surtout les variantes proposées. Après, c'est vrai que graphiquement ça rend pas encore très bien mais du moment que c'est fonctionnel, c'est ce qui m'importe le plus.

Encore merci !

its awesome thibault