Answers.Body: <p>However, while not a developer myself, from a more blurry vision point of view, lurking from a more mathematical attempt at understanding or a more chess land point of view, there might be ways to create some norms. Or each engine would have to come up with their own parsing syntax for such configuration files that would make sense in their particular design of interaction between move tree searches, and position evaluation modules.</p>
  <p>In exhaustive origin group of engine, there are many decisions that do not require the full position information consequences of the candidate move being considered and dismissed.  It would have to be through the leaf evaluations only, which do affect how such non evaluated positions get dismissed.  In the lc0 group, my understanding is that each position visited in some search gets an evaluation of the full position information.</p>
  <p>Already there, you would have a non-standard split, conceptually.  But I do not see this as impossible. It would require a common framework, for this to make sense independently of the engine, for the user's analytical abilities or sparring influence interpretation back to chess-land.</p>
  <p>I think, and I might be having a pet topic here, that some thinking and discussion of engine development purposes by more than the engine dev community but more of the chess community at large is needed.  As some research is needed about what those difference conceptions of evaluation in chess-land can be useful from the chess human user case point of view, for the engine software.</p>
  <p>Access to the internal chess search model, might become its own optimization criteria, in tournaments, (or other developmental optimization competition).</p>
  <p>As it would mean looking twice at what has been happening over many years now. And what is the role of position evaluation, as a human accessible concept, from the user end of such software?  (also not only the current position question, but the searches positions with their static evaluations).</p>
  <p>I find what I saw of UCI, to have been a frozen thing in pair with the culture of tournaments that has been developed to mimic that of the otherwise diverse human population involved in tournament-centric chess.</p>
  <p>That they are used for human own chess activity does not seem to be part of that selection process, and yet, it has been done without flinching or eyebrow shift.</p>
  
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2024-05-27T14:01:35.963Z
Answers.Text: After looking in some different chess GUIs, I found that the Chess Assistant GUI offers the possibility to directly exclude moves from a analysis, a window will appear with checkboxes where you can chose each possible move to be be included in the search (or not). I think my initial question should more ask about the appropriate chess GUI to be used instead of asking for a particular engine. I found that the various chess GUIs like Chessbase, Chess Assistant, Arena, all these have different options, but none of them has it all, although they are all useful in the purposes they offer.
Answers.UserDisplayName: MikeTrans
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2024-05-26T00:15:21.267Z
Answers.LastActivityDate: 2024-05-26T00:15:21.267Z
Answers.UserDisplayName: dbdb
Body: <p>Years ago, the engine version of Shredder 10+ had such a 'god mode' where you could enter manually an evaluation after a certain line of moves, and then going back to the original position the engine's search would be different by excluding this move line. Or, as an alternative, and instead of MultiPV or Next-Best-Move, I'd like to have the ability to exclude a specific move from the search.
  Such a function in the UCI options would help me tremendously for the analysis. Or do engine authors not provide such a function because it doesn't help?</p>
  <p>I've come to examine the chess engine SugaR AI ICCF 2.50 which writes &quot;experience&quot; files as a learning process, and I have even found some tools to edit such a file, there is a tool called PlainToEXP.exe where you can create an experience file based on such a initial format:</p>
  <p>fen 5k2/8/1p6/1P4K1/P4P2/1B6/3b1P2/8 b - - 2 8
  move f8e8
  score 10000
  ply 100
  result 1
  e</p>
  <p>This is essentially telling the engine that the move f8e8 would lead to a win for white - whether this is true or not is a purely secondary aspect, and I found that this has indeed led to a different search well before this line happens on the board after linking such a created experience file. This, and the persistent hashtables leads to a much faster and newly oriented search - a feature where the synergy of a good human chess analyzer and a strong engine would really work well together. But maybe that isn't the case for various reasons.</p>
  <p>As nice as it is, this is not an ideal solution but more a 'workaround' for what I'm looking for. I'm really interested to find an engine that has such a function built-in in the UCI options to quickly exclude lines where I don't want the engine to lose its time for futile searches. Or at least a function that comes close to it.</p>
  <p>Added on 25.04.2024 which should solve my question and concern:</p>
  <p>Shredder Chess 13 had this feature of excluding one or more moves, or focusing on one or more moves: You make the move on the chessboard while holding the SHIFT key and it will exclude this move in the search; you make the same but holding CTRL and it will only focus on this move. You can repeat this with a series of moves to include/exclude. The Shredder 13 engine, while being much stronger than its predecessor (+300 Elo points according to the creators) no longer has the capability of position learning and therefore no more 'god mode' to enter an evaluation directly; technically, such an evaluation was transferred to the Hashtables for the current search, but this doesn't happen; this function is still in the context menu of the engine but it does not what it says, so don't rely on it. However the procedure above should be enough for a good analysis.</p>
  
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2024-05-11T11:29:58.110Z
Comments.Text: Most engines such as stockfish supports the uci directive (searchmoves) to search only a specified move or moves. With python script, your exclude feature can be easily implemented with the help of the searchmoves feature.
Comments.UserDisplayName: ferdy
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2024-05-13T18:28:51.953Z
Comments.Text: Thanks ferdy for your feedback! I have not noticed this function which is inside the UCI description provided by Shredder Chess. Although doing the exact contrary it will be helpful for me. Greetings!
Comments.UserDisplayName: MikeTrans
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2024-05-14T02:32:29.327Z
Comments.Text: If you are using a gui, you can use the winboard gui, install stockfish engine, analyze a position with multipv, exclude, and include moves are supported.
Comments.UserDisplayName: ferdy
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2024-05-15T23:47:14.460Z
Comments.Text: I think that UCI allows each engine some set of "idiosyncratic" options.  But tournament main optimization goal for devs, is not conducive to features that allow human training or learning by playing with the internals.   Even open source.  Such things would be each developper own fancy or initiative.  There may have been a time where some engine were expressly made to test and show a various set of hypothetic heuristics.
  
  Even old Fritz versions had some handicap chess mode that allowed freezing some material, while letting engine do its thing on the rest.  Not anymore.
Comments.UserDisplayName: dbdb
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2024-05-15T23:50:32.280Z
Comments.Text: I think there is a more general question that would contain yours, and I would be that UCI and ability to enter a tournament imposes internal trace upon request from any position.
  maintained for all versions.  Well, I cheated.  I gave one example of what I think is needed to answer the more general question of looking beyond the oracle usage per position inferred from engine pool based ELOS measures (based on game outcomes).
  So I avoid the untangible trap, but also give options to consider other means to accomplish what you would seek, and my own other non-black box ways of sparring.
Comments.UserDisplayName: dbdb
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2024-05-15T23:55:40.997Z
Comments.Text: Also, I have been dreaming of something similar.  For example, a pure positional sparring engine, just as a user experiment... Give any position, and its leaf evaluation is blind about any material exchange gain (or worse, any capture is evaluated against the ones who capture).
  I guess:  unleash the human imagination in the own autonomous exploration of the board, accelerated by a useful engine design.  Not only meant for other devs. Bring in the user into the chess level model of its algorithm (without asking coder savvy, only chess and the will to understand what was coded back to chess).
Comments.UserDisplayName: dbdb
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2024-05-15T23:56:45.287Z
Comments.Text: Ferdy answer has me curious.  Can you provide some link to the documentation about it?
Comments.UserDisplayName: dbdb
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2024-05-16T00:06:48.680Z
Comments.Text: I realize that you want to help the engine, but that means user access to the entrails.  I made a thread where I wanted to cripple the engine, and train possibly against the same engine not cripple, while using the crippled engine, so I would actually learn about the pruning or spend my energies there.  By having some say the shallower branches leaves, and possibly use my human current evaluation there for a few branches. But all such questions, mean UCI access to the internals of the partial tree searches and evaluation function.  There should be a library of heuristics made visible.
Comments.UserDisplayName: dbdb
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2024-05-16T13:40:07.877Z
Comments.Text: @dbdb, thank you for your interesting ideas. I provide you here some links that expressly talk about this function of 'god mode' implemented in Shredder 10, in articles by the computer chess expert Lars Bremer, alas it's in German; use Google Translate to put the text in acceptable English.
Comments.UserDisplayName: MikeTrans
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2024-05-16T13:49:12.213Z
Comments.Text: In this first link the topic is about what computers cannot do, the author also talks about helping the computer with this god mode, read the part where it's talked about Shredder 10: https://computerschach.de/Files/2008/Was%20der%20Computer%20noch%20nicht%20kann.pdf  ;
Comments.UserDisplayName: MikeTrans
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2024-05-16T13:49:20.633Z
Comments.Text: another link is much more focused explaining the great help when doing analysis of chess positions - but also where the limits are, it treats about persistency of hashtables, retro-analysis and this 'god mode' of Shredder. The link: https://computerschach.de/Files/2006/Shredder%2010:%20Der%20Analysator.pdf   ; I hope this is useful for you and it should show the importance of using a chess engine with such a function and why it would be fine to have it in the currently strongest engines.
Comments.UserDisplayName: MikeTrans
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2024-05-16T14:00:39.190Z
Comments.Text: My method above which explains how to insert a pre-determined evaluation in the *.exp learning file of an engine works with the following engines or engine derivatives: EMAN 9.81 64-bit (AVX2, bmi2 etc.) , SugaR AI ICCF, SugaR AI 2.50 which are all very strong engines, the last 2 derived from Stockfish engine.
Comments.UserDisplayName: MikeTrans
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2024-05-16T14:05:25.653Z
Comments.Text: Here the links to get the necessary experience editing tools: https://github.com/MichaelB7/SugaR-AI-ICCF/blob/master/SugaR%20AI%20Experience%20Tools.7z  ; in the next link look for 'PlainToExp', a repositery linked by Marco Zerbinatti, co-author of important chess engines: https://github.com/Zerbinati?page=2&tab=repositories
Comments.UserDisplayName: MikeTrans
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2024-05-19T23:21:53.530Z
Comments.Text: Congrats on making sense of some of my posts.  Re-reading now. Thanks for the above.
  I had passed the edit window, in one of them.
Comments.UserDisplayName: dbdb
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2024-05-25T15:13:56.907Z
Comments.Text: @dbdb which documentation are you referring to?
Comments.UserDisplayName: ferdy
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2024-05-25T23:48:20.040Z
Comments.Text: @ferdy  uci directive (searchmoves) to search only a specified move or moves. I gather that is standard UCI? I could google.  BTW how often does the UCI standard get updated, in relation to the evolutions of the engine designs and formalisms (thinking of NN based engines, and tree searches with different stopping criteria). This might not be where to ask.  If there is no such as place, I guess I can find the standard text file.  I thought this was a new object.
Comments.UserDisplayName: dbdb
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2024-05-25T23:58:00.763Z
Comments.Text: @MikeTrans By learning process, you are not specifying any kind of existing engine learning technology like NNue, or LC0 which are essentially designed as learning engines or submodule (in SF case) learning feedback loop on its non-NNue simple evaluation. (I might not be up-to-date there).  This is a question. And here is a sub-question.
Comments.UserDisplayName: dbdb
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2024-05-26T00:08:45.553Z
Comments.Text: using answer space.  tired of the 5 mins..
Comments.UserDisplayName: dbdb
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2024-05-26T00:50:16.443Z
Comments.Text: @dbdb yes it is in uci standard https://github.com/fsmosca/UCIChessEngineProtocol. Updates depends on demands, clarifications, usefulness, etc. If the feature is really needed by the engine, then you can propose what needs to be added. I tried to maintain that standard in my github repo.
Comments.UserDisplayName: ferdy
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2024-05-26T01:15:42.513Z
Comments.Text: @ferdy  Thanks a lot. I did a fly by on issues and discussions, and their backlinks to talkchess (even faster read there, to gauge if I can make any sense, or to offload URL for later reading).  Here is something that if it were researched or worked on, might involve , possibly, aspects common with the op, question, as I understand it currently.
Comments.UserDisplayName: dbdb
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2024-05-26T01:15:56.737Z
Comments.Text: UCI protocol for chess variants
  http://www.talkchess.com/forum3/viewtopic.php?t=54167#p594511
  https://github.com/fsmosca/UCIChessEngineProtocol/discussions/6
  > There is also at least some interest in UCI engines that play (slightly modified) versions of regular chess (for instance the special Stockfish version discussed in http://www.talkchess.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=53885).
Comments.UserDisplayName: dbdb
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2024-06-25T03:15:25.883Z
Comments.Text: For helpmates, you can use Jacobi which offer user-defined constraints
Comments.UserDisplayName: Laska
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2024-06-25T09:42:33.733Z
Comments.Text: Thank you Laska. Please read the end of my thread which I have updated, I've found the feature I wanted in the software I own (Shredder Chess 13).
Comments.UserDisplayName: MikeTrans
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2024-06-26T14:25:05.027Z
Comments.Text: Mikertans: Alas, the Shredder 13 engine while being much stronger than its predecessor [...] has no longer the capability [...] to enter an evaluation directly; ...
  Me:  It does seem compatible with my understanding working hypothesis, that the development target for creative optimization is indeed ELO pool points, and the purpose of human per position analysis or sparring, has been neglected, or got in the way.  Fritz and now this Shredder branch of engine species evolution.  Also thanks for sharing solutions to your specifc question (existence of things to look into).
Comments.UserDisplayName: dbdb
Tags: <engines>
Title: Are there free chess engines where you can exclude a specific move line from the search tree, or give it a manual evaluation?
ThreadText: # Are there free chess engines where you can exclude a specific move line from the search tree, or give it a manual evaluation?
  
  (Asked by: username_0 on 2024-05-10)
  
  Years ago, the engine version of Shredder 10+ had such a 'god mode' where you could enter manually an evaluation after a certain line of moves, and then going back to the original position the engine's search would be different by excluding this move line. Or, as an alternative, and instead of MultiPV or Next-Best-Move, I'd like to have the ability to exclude a specific move from the search.
  Such a function in the UCI options would help me tremendously for the analysis. Or do engine authors not provide such a function because it doesn't help?
  
  I've come to examine the chess engine SugaR AI ICCF 2.50 which writes "experience" files as a learning process, and I have even found some tools to edit such a file, there is a tool called PlainToEXP.exe where you can create an experience file based on such a initial format:
  
  fen 5k2/8/1p6/1P4K1/P4P2/1B6/3b1P2/8 b - - 2 8
  move f8e8
  score 10000
  ply 100
  result 1
  e
  
  This is essentially telling the engine that the move f8e8 would lead to a win for white - whether this is true or not is a purely secondary aspect, and I found that this has indeed led to a different search well before this line happens on the board after linking such a created experience file. This, and the persistent hashtables leads to a much faster and newly oriented search - a feature where the synergy of a good human chess analyzer and a strong engine would really work well together. But maybe that isn't the case for various reasons.
  
  As nice as it is, this is not an ideal solution but more a 'workaround' for what I'm looking for. I'm really interested to find an engine that has such a function built-in in the UCI options to quickly exclude lines where I don't want the engine to lose its time for futile searches. Or at least a function that comes close to it.
  
  Added on 25.04.2024 which should solve my question and concern:
  
  Shredder Chess 13 had this feature of excluding one or more moves, or focusing on one or more moves: You make the move on the chessboard while holding the SHIFT key and it will exclude this move in the search; you make the same but holding CTRL and it will only focus on this move. You can repeat this with a series of moves to include/exclude. The Shredder 13 engine, while being much stronger than its predecessor (+300 Elo points according to the creators) no longer has the capability of position learning and therefore no more 'god mode' to enter an evaluation directly; technically, such an evaluation was transferred to the Hashtables for the current search, but this doesn't happen; this function is still in the context menu of the engine but it does not what it says, so don't rely on it. However the procedure above should be enough for a good analysis.
  
  **Tags:** engines
  
  > **Comments:**
  > **username_1**: Most engines such as stockfish supports the uci directive (searchmoves) to search only a specified move or moves. With python script, your exclude feature can be easily implemented with the help of the searchmoves feature.  
  > **username_0**: Thanks username_1 for your feedback! I have not noticed this function which is inside the UCI description provided by Shredder Chess. Although doing the exact contrary it will be helpful for me. Greetings!  
  > **username_1**: If you are using a gui, you can use the winboard gui, install stockfish engine, analyze a position with multipv, exclude, and include moves are supported.  
  > **username_2**: I think that UCI allows each engine some set of "idiosyncratic" options.  But tournament main optimization goal for devs, is not conducive to features that allow human training or learning by playing with the internals.   Even open source.  Such things would be each developper own fancy or initiative.  There may have been a time where some engine were expressly made to test and show a various set of hypothetic heuristics.  Even old Fritz versions had some handicap chess mode that allowed freezing some material, while letting engine do its thing on the rest.  Not anymore.  
  > **username_2**: I think there is a more general question that would contain yours, and I would be that UCI and ability to enter a tournament imposes internal trace upon request from any position. maintained for all versions.  Well, I cheated.  I gave one example of what I think is needed to answer the more general question of looking beyond the oracle usage per position inferred from engine pool based ELOS measures (based on game outcomes). So I avoid the untangible trap, but also give options to consider other means to accomplish what you would seek, and my own other non-black box ways of sparring.  
  > **username_2**: Also, I have been dreaming of something similar.  For example, a pure positional sparring engine, just as a user experiment... Give any position, and its leaf evaluation is blind about any material exchange gain (or worse, any capture is evaluated against the ones who capture). I guess:  unleash the human imagination in the own autonomous exploration of the board, accelerated by a useful engine design.  Not only meant for other devs. Bring in the user into the chess level model of its algorithm (without asking coder savvy, only chess and the will to understand what was coded back to chess).  
  > **username_2**: username_1 answer has me curious.  Can you provide some link to the documentation about it?  
  > **username_2**: I realize that you want to help the engine, but that means user access to the entrails.  I made a thread where I wanted to cripple the engine, and train possibly against the same engine not cripple, while using the crippled engine, so I would actually learn about the pruning or spend my energies there.  By having some say the shallower branches leaves, and possibly use my human current evaluation there for a few branches. But all such questions, mean UCI access to the internals of the partial tree searches and evaluation function.  There should be a library of heuristics made visible.  
  > **username_0**: @username_2, thank you for your interesting ideas. I provide you here some links that expressly talk about this function of 'god mode' implemented in Shredder 10, in articles by the computer chess expert Lars Bremer, alas it's in German; use Google Translate to put the text in acceptable English.  
  > **username_0**: In this first link the topic is about what computers cannot do, the author also talks about helping the computer with this god mode, read the part where it's talked about Shredder 10: https://computerschach.de/Files/2008/Was%20der%20Computer%20noch%20nicht%20kann.pdf  ;  
  > **username_0**: another link is much more focused explaining the great help when doing analysis of chess positions - but also where the limits are, it treats about persistency of hashtables, retro-analysis and this 'god mode' of Shredder. The link: https://computerschach.de/Files/2006/Shredder%2010:%20Der%20Analysator.pdf   ; I hope this is useful for you and it should show the importance of using a chess engine with such a function and why it would be fine to have it in the currently strongest engines.  
  > **username_0**: My method above which explains how to insert a pre-determined evaluation in the *.exp learning file of an engine works with the following engines or engine derivatives: EMAN 9.81 64-bit (AVX2, bmi2 etc.) , SugaR AI ICCF, SugaR AI 2.50 which are all very strong engines, the last 2 derived from Stockfish engine.  
  > **username_0**: Here the links to get the necessary experience editing tools: https://github.com/MichaelB7/SugaR-AI-ICCF/blob/master/SugaR%20AI%20Experience%20Tools.7z  ; in the next link look for 'PlainToExp', a repositery linked by Marco Zerbinatti, co-author of important chess engines: https://github.com/Zerbinati?page=2&tab=repositories  
  > **username_2**: Congrats on making sense of some of my posts.  Re-reading now. Thanks for the above. I had passed the edit window, in one of them.  
  > **username_1**: @username_2 which documentation are you referring to?  
  > **username_2**: @username_1  uci directive (searchmoves) to search only a specified move or moves. I gather that is standard UCI? I could google.  BTW how often does the UCI standard get updated, in relation to the evolutions of the engine designs and formalisms (thinking of NN based engines, and tree searches with different stopping criteria). This might not be where to ask.  If there is no such as place, I guess I can find the standard text file.  I thought this was a new object.  
  > **username_2**: @username_0 By learning process, you are not specifying any kind of existing engine learning technology like NNue, or LC0 which are essentially designed as learning engines or submodule (in SF case) learning feedback loop on its non-NNue simple evaluation. (I might not be up-to-date there).  This is a question. And here is a sub-question.  
  > **username_2**: using answer space.  tired of the 5 mins..  
  > **username_1**: @username_2 yes it is in uci standard https://github.com/fsmosca/UCIChessEngineProtocol. Updates depends on demands, clarifications, usefulness, etc. If the feature is really needed by the engine, then you can propose what needs to be added. I tried to maintain that standard in my github repo.  
  > **username_2**: @username_1  Thanks a lot. I did a fly by on issues and discussions, and their backlinks to talkchess (even faster read there, to gauge if I can make any sense, or to offload URL for later reading).  Here is something that if it were researched or worked on, might involve , possibly, aspects common with the op, question, as I understand it currently.  
  > **username_2**: UCI protocol for chess variants http://www.talkchess.com/forum3/viewtopic.php?t=54167#p594511 https://github.com/fsmosca/UCIChessEngineProtocol/discussions/6 > There is also at least some interest in UCI engines that play (slightly modified) versions of regular chess (for instance the special Stockfish version discussed in http://www.talkchess.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=53885).  
  > **username_3**: For helpmates, you can use Jacobi which offer user-defined constraints  
  > **username_0**: Thank you username_3. Please read the end of my thread which I have updated, I've found the feature I wanted in the software I own (Shredder Chess 13).  
  > **username_2**: Mikertans: Alas, the Shredder 13 engine while being much stronger than its predecessor [...] has no longer the capability [...] to enter an evaluation directly; ... Me:  It does seem compatible with my understanding working hypothesis, that the development target for creative optimization is indeed ELO pool points, and the purpose of human per position analysis or sparring, has been neglected, or got in the way.  Fritz and now this Shredder branch of engine species evolution.  Also thanks for sharing solutions to your specifc question (existence of things to look into).  
  
  ---
  
  ## 1 answers
  
  ### Answer by username_2 on 2024-05-26. Score: 1
  
  However, while not a developer myself, from a more blurry vision point of view, lurking from a more mathematical attempt at understanding or a more chess land point of view, there might be ways to create some norms. Or each engine would have to come up with their own parsing syntax for such configuration files that would make sense in their particular design of interaction between move tree searches, and position evaluation modules.
  
  In exhaustive origin group of engine, there are many decisions that do not require the full position information consequences of the candidate move being considered and dismissed. It would have to be through the leaf evaluations only, which do affect how such non evaluated positions get dismissed. In the lc0 group, my understanding is that each position visited in some search gets an evaluation of the full position information.
  
  Already there, you would have a non-standard split, conceptually. But I do not see this as impossible. It would require a common framework, for this to make sense independently of the engine, for the user's analytical abilities or sparring influence interpretation back to chess-land.
  
  I think, and I might be having a pet topic here, that some thinking and discussion of engine development purposes by more than the engine dev community but more of the chess community at large is needed. As some research is needed about what those difference conceptions of evaluation in chess-land can be useful from the chess human user case point of view, for the engine software.
  
  Access to the internal chess search model, might become its own optimization criteria, in tournaments, (or other developmental optimization competition).
  
  As it would mean looking twice at what has been happening over many years now. And what is the role of position evaluation, as a human accessible concept, from the user end of such software? (also not only the current position question, but the searches positions with their static evaluations).
  
  I find what I saw of UCI, to have been a frozen thing in pair with the culture of tournaments that has been developed to mimic that of the otherwise diverse human population involved in tournament-centric chess.
  
  That they are used for human own chess activity does not seem to be part of that selection process, and yet, it has been done without flinching or eyebrow shift.
  
  > **Comments:**
  > **username_0**: After looking in some different chess GUIs, I found that the Chess Assistant GUI offers the possibility to directly exclude moves from a analysis, a window will appear with checkboxes where you can chose each possible move to be be included in the search (or not). I think my initial question should more ask about the appropriate chess GUI to be used instead of asking for a particular engine. I found that the various chess GUIs like Chessbase, Chess Assistant, Arena, all these have different options, but none of them has it all, although they are all useful in the purposes they offer.  
  
  ---
  
  