OpenLLM-France/wikimedia huggingface dataset:
# Chess Opening Theory/1. f4/1...e5/2. fxe5/2...d6/3. exd6
## 3.exd6

After this, Black's only sensible move is Bxd6, developing with a threat. However, Nf6, the Langheld Gambit has also been tried with similar ideas to the mainline but with a Queen on c7 instead of a pawn.

## Theory table

| 3 | 4 |
| ... Bxd6 | Nf3 g5 |
| ... Nf6!? |
# Chess Opening Theory/1. f4/1...e5/2. fxe5/2...d6/3. exd6/3...Bxd6
## 3...Bxd6

This move develops with a threat. There are three sane ways to stop Qh4+. The first one, Nf3, is the best move. The second one, g3?!, runs into a rapid drill attack after 3...h5. A sample line: Nf3 h4! Nxh4? (gxh4 is better, but black has good compensation for the pawn after the simple 5...Bg4) Rxh4! gxh4 Qxh4# The third one, 4.h4??, runs into Bg3 mate! Also, one more trap is Nh3?? Bxh3 and Qh4 mate to follow.

## Theory table

| 4 | |
| Nf3 g5 | +/= |
| g3?! h5 | =/- |
| h4?? Bg3# | 0-1 |
# Chess Opening Theory/1. f4/1...e5/2. fxe5/2...d6/3. exd6/3...Bxd6/4. Nf3
## 4.Nf3

This is the most common move, and is also the best. The most common, and most aggressive reply, is the Lasker variation, 4...g5

## Theory table

| 4 | 5 | 6 | |
| ... g5 | g3 g4 | Nh4 | +/= |
# Chess Opening Theory/1. f4/1...e5/2. fxe5/2...d6/3. Nf3
## 3. Nf3

This odd-looking move is only a fanciful move-order, as the best continuation in dxe5 Nxe5 Bd6 Nf3.

## Theory table

| 3 | 4 | 5 | |
| ... dxe5 | Nxe5 Bd6 | Nf3 g5 | +/= |
When contributing to this Wikibook, please follow the Conventions for organization.
# Chess Opening Theory/1. f4/1...e5/2. fxe5/2...d6/3. exd6/3...Bxd6/4. Nf3/4...g5
## 4...g5

This is the Lasker variation, the most aggressive and double edged line. Black now threatens g4 followed by Qh4+, Bxg3+, and mate to follow. The most common move, and, according to Lakdawala, "Our only hope of wresting the advantage". The game now turns into a full-blown firefight.

## Theory table

| 5 | 6 | |
| h3?? Bg3# | | 0-1 |
| g3 g4 | Nh4 | +/= |
# Chess Opening Theory/1. f4/1...e5/2. fxe5/2...d6/3. Nf3/3...dxe5/4. Nxe5/4...Bd6
## 4...Bd6

This attacks the knight. Since 5. d4? Bxe5 6. dxe5 Qxd1+ is uncomfortable for White, taking on double isolated e-pawns and forfeiting castling rights, while 5. Nc4?? Qh4+! 6. g3 Qxg3+!! 7. hxg3 Bxg3# is lost, and 5. Nd3? Qh4+ 6. Nf2 Bxh2 is equal, White is well advised to transpose to mainline theory with 5. Nf3.
When contributing to this Wikibook, please follow the Conventions for organization.
# Chess Opening Theory/1. f4/1...e5/2. fxe5/2...d6/3. exd6/3...Bxd6/4. Nf3/4...g5/5. g3
## 5. g3

This move strengthens White's kingside and gives the white knight a safe place at h4.
When contributing to this Wikibook, please follow the Conventions for organization.
# Chess Opening Theory/1. f4/1...e5/2. fxe5/2...d6/3. Nf3/3...dxe5
## 3...dxe5

This move gives White two good options. Accept the pawn with Nxe5, or play e4 and decline the pawn.

## Theory table

| 4 | 5 |
| e4 | |
| Nxe5 Bd6 | Nf3 |
When contributing to this Wikibook, please follow the Conventions for organization.
# Chess Opening Theory/1. f4/1...e5/2. fxe5/2...d6/3. Nf3/3...dxe5/4. Nxe5
## 4. Nxe5

This move is the From's Gambit accepted. The only way to get compensation for the lost pawn and transpose back into mainline theory is 4...Bd6.

## Theory table

| 4 | 5 | |
| ... Bd6 | Nf3 g5 | +/= |
When contributing to this Wikibook, please follow the Conventions for organization.
# Chess Opening Theory/1. f4/1...e5/2. fxe5/2...d6
## 2...d6

This is the main line of the From's Gambit.

## Theory table

| 3 | 4 | 5 | |
| exd6 Bxd6 | Nf3 g5 | g3 | +/= |
| Nf3!? dxe5 | Nxe5 Bd6 | transposes to above variation move 4 | +/= |
# Franco-Benoni Defence

The Franco-Benoni Defence, also known as Franco-Sicilian Defence is a rarely seen opening and can be considered surprising. Nf3 transposes into a Sicilian Defence line whereas d5 transposes into a Benoni-styled line.

## Theory table

For explanation of theory tables, see theory table and for notation, see algebraic notation. .
    1.e4 e6 2.d4 c5
| 3 | 4 |
| Nf3 cxd4 | Nxd4 ... | = to 1...c5 2. Nf3 e6 3. d4 |
| d5 ... | = |
| c3 ... | = |
| Ne2 d5 | Nbc3 c4 | Bf4 Bb4 | += |
When contributing to this Wikibook, please follow the Conventions for organization.

## References

* This Chess related article is a stub. Please assist Wikibooks by expanding it.
# Chess Opening Theory/1. e4/1...e6/2. d3/2...d5/3. Nd2
## French Defense: King's Indian Attack

With Nd2 White transposes to the King's Indian Attack. The next moves for white are usually Ngf3, g3, Bg2, O-O and Re1, preparing to fight for the center but also looking at the long term plan of directly attacking the king. This is an excellent reply for players who want to avoid the tricky lines of the French Defense while also deviating away from usual openings.
# e6b6 Cincinnati Style

e6b6 Cincinnati style follows the main line of the e6b6 defense up until move 5, where Black plays 5...Ne7 instead of 5...Nf6. It starts with the moves:
* e4 e6
* d4 b6
* Nf3 Bb7
* Nc3 Bb4
* Bd3 Ne7
This setup was popularized by the Cincinnati Chess Club, hence its name, and has been used a total of 12 times by masters in major FIDE tournaments.

## e6b6 Defense

The e6b6 Defense is an hypermodern opening focusing on controlling the important d5 and e4 squares. The move e7-e6 supports a d5 pawn push, the move b7-b6 prepares Bb7, and the move Bb7 controls the d5 and e4 squares directly. It wasn't used too often until famous Youtuber and International Master Levy Rozman created a chess course on the defense. Now, it is one of the more common defenses and has been used by many strong players as a secret weapon.

## Description

The Cincinnati Style of the e6b6 Defense is a more passive way of playing the defense. Instead of the move 5...Nf6, putting more pressure on the d5 and e4 squares, Black plays 5...Ne7, supporting the eventual pawn break of f7-f5. The pawn break f7-f5 is crucial in Black's game plan. After castling, Black looks to soon push his f-pawn in order to move the e5 pawn out of Black's bishop on b7 and open the file for Black's rook on f8. The opening does help Black construct a big attack on the castled king.

## Main Variations

After 1. e4 e6 2. d4 b6 3. Nf3 Bb7 4. Nc3 Bb4 5. Bd3 Ne7 the most important continuations are:
* 6. O-O (Main line)
** 6...O-O (Classical variation)
** 6...Bxc3
** 6...Ng6
* 6. Bg5
** 6...O-O
** 6...Bxc3+
* 6. Bd2
** 6...O-O
** 6...d6
* 6. a3
When contributing to this Wikibook, please follow the Conventions for organization.
# French Defence

By advancing the d-pawn two squares, Black poses an immediate challenge to the powerful white center. White has a number of responses:
3. Nc3: There is a large amount of complex theory behind this move. Black has many possible answers, including 3...Bb4 (the Winawer Variation), which leads to extremely complex positions (which are usually closed).
3. e5 (Advance Variation): White advances the pawn and puts immediate pressure on Black's kingside, but Black will be more than capable of putting the pawn wedge under serious attack with moves like c5, Nc6, Qb6, and Nf5 after Nh6.
3. Nd2 (Tarrasch Variation): This is less common than 3. Nc3, as it blocks the bishop on c1 and does not put any pressure on d5. It is much safer but also less ambitious and harder to get an advantage with. Black has two main options here: they can play 3...Nf6 to force 4. e5 and then attack the pawn wedge at both base and head with the breaks c5 and f6, or they can play 3...c5, eventually ending up with active pieces while dealing with an isolated d-pawn.
3. exd5 (Exchange Variation): This is unambitious and gives Black equal chances, but it avoids the complications of the other variations.

## Theory table

For explanation of theory tables, see theory table and for notation, see algebraic notation.
| 1. e4 e6 2. d4 d5 |
| | 3 | 4 |
| French Defence (Main Line) | Nc3 Nf6 | Bg5 Be7 | = |
| Tarrasch Variation | Nd2 Nf6 | e5 Nfd7 | = |
| Advance Variation | e5 c5 | c3 Nc6 | = |
| Exchange Variation | exd5 exd5 | Bd3 Bd6 | = |
When contributing to this Wikibook, please follow the Conventions for organization.

## References

* Kasparov, Garry, & Keene, Raymond 1989 Batsford chess openings 2. ISBN 0-8050-3409-9.
# King's Indian Attack
### 2...d5

Black continues with the mainline French moves whereas white is preparing to enter a King's Indian Attack setup after Nd2. White can also transpose to other openings.

## Theory Table

For explanation of theory tables, see theory table and for notation, see algebraic notation. .
1.e4 e6 2.d3 d5
| | 3 | 4 |
| French Defense | Nd2 Nf6 | |
| | Qe2 Nf6 | |
When contributing to this Wikibook, please follow the Conventions for organization.
# Chess Opening Theory/1. e4/1...e6/2. d4/2...b6/3. Nf3/3...Bb7
## e6b6 Defense

The e6b6 defense is an chess opening that traditionally begins with the moves:
* e4 e6
* d4 b6
* Nf3 Bb7
It is named the e6b6 defense because, obviously, it starts with the moves 1...e6 and 2...b6. Many professional chess players have implemented the defense into their repertoire as a secret weapon in the french defense.

## Description

The e6b6 defense is an hypermodern chess opening focusing on controlling the crucial d5 and e4 squares. The move e7-e6 supports a d7-d5 pawn push, the move b7-b6 prepares Bb7, and the move Bb7 controls the d5 and e4 squares directly. It wasn't used too often by casual chess players until famous Youtuber and International Master Levy Rozman created a chess course on the defense. Now, it is one of the more common defenses and has been used by many strong players.
The Owen Defense and English Defence are similar openings where Black often goes for an e6b6 setup.
When contributing to this Wikibook, please follow the Conventions for organization.
# French Defense
### 2...c5
## Theory Table

For explanation of theory tables, see theory table and for notation, see algebraic notation. .
1.e4 e6 2.d3 c5
| | 3 | 4 |
| Sicilian | Nf3 Nc6 | to 1...c5 2.Nf3 e6 3.d3 |
| | g3 Nc6 | |
When contributing to this Wikibook, please follow the Conventions for organization.
# Chess Opening Theory/1. e4/1...e6/2. d4
## 2. d4 - French Defence

One of the more common responses to Black's intended French Defence. White creates the ideal pawn center with pawns on d4 and e4. This allows White to control the center and develop Bishops and Queen actively. The French Defence goes on with 2... d5.

## Theory table

For explanation of theory tables, see theory table and for notation, see algebraic notation.
| 1. e4 e6 2. d4 |
| | 2 |
| French Defence | ... d5 | = |
| Franco-Benoni Defence | ... c5 | = |
| Kingston Defence | ... f5 | += |
| Mediterranean Defense | ... Nf6 | += |
| Mediterranean Defense | ... Nf6 | e5 Nd5 | c4 Ne7 | += |
When contributing to this Wikibook, please follow the Conventions for organization.

## References

* Kasparov, Garry, & Keene, Raymond 1989 Batsford chess openings 2. ISBN 0-8050-3409-9.
# French Defence: Main line

3.Nc3 is White's most popular move against the French at the top level, and is considered the most challenging option. White develops a piece and keeps the diagonals open for both bishops (unlike 3.Nd2, the Tarrasch Variation), as well as putting pressure on the d5 pawn and protecting the e4 pawn. Black has 4 main options now: Nf6 (The Classical Variation), Bb4 (The Winawer Variation), dxe4 (The Rubinstein Variation), and c5, entering into the Sicilian by some players or French with others with the Marshall Gambit.

### Approximate Chances
#### Masters

White wins: 36% | Draw: 41% | Black wins: 23%

#### Lichess

White wins: 50% | Draw: 5% | Black Wins: 45%

## Theory table

For explanation of theory tables, see theory table and for notation, see algebraic notation. .
| 1. e4 e6 2. d4 d5 3.Nc3 |
| | 3 | 4 |
| Classical Defence | ... Nf6 | Bg5 Be7 | = |
| Winawer Variation | ... Bb4 | e5 c5 | = |
| Rubinstein variation | ... dxe4 | Nxe4 Nd7 | = |
| Marshall Gambit | ... c5 | Nf3 Cxd4 | = |
| | ... ... | exd5 exd5 | +/= |
When contributing to this Wikibook, please follow the Conventions for organization.

## References

* Kasparov, Garry, & Keene, Raymond 1989 Batsford chess openings 2. ISBN 0-8050-3409-9.
* This Chess related article is a stub. Please assist Wikibooks by expanding it.
# King's Indian Attack

This is a way for White to avoid the "classical" French Defence. Though White's game looks less active (White will have to fianchetto his king's bishop, leaving time for Black to develop), a powerful attack is possible by advancing king's pawn to e5, building a strong outpost. Like in a sicilian defence, White will launch a king-side attack, and Black can counter-attack at the queen side.
The main continuation is d5, though c5 is also correct (many transpositions exist in the King's Indian).

# Theory Table

For explanation of theory tables, see theory table and for notation, see algebraic notation. .
1. e4 e6 2. d3
| | 2 |
| Main line | ... d5 | = |
| | ... c5 | = |
When contributing to this Wikibook, please follow the Conventions for organization.
# Comparison of crank based leg mechanism/circle

Adding more legs will results in a wheel.
# Comparison of crank based leg mechanism/extra simple walker

The "extra simple walker" based on http://www.instructables.com/id/Extra-simple-walking-mechanism/ is not relevant enough for its own wikipedia article.
However: Being very simple makes it a good base line. The mechanism is by no means ideal, but it is possible to build a vehicle around it.
The basic mechanism looks like this:
The vehicle looks like this:
So. lets look at the walking vehicle:
The green base plate is going up and down a lot. It would be a very hard ride, just from the up and down. Not as easy to see is the speed variation:
Now take a very close look at the animation:

## Gallery

* Base Mechanism
* Robot hold still
* Walking robot
* with speed plotted
* 3D-Animation
# Comparison of crank based leg mechanism/grooved
## Source

This Walking mechanism was first published by Joseph E. Shigley.
This chapter follows the original paper very closely. This is not mend as a plagiarism, but for making this chapter easier to understand.

## Description

This mechanism has a nice looking locus:
Unfortunately, one of the fix points and rockers is below ground.As suggested by Shigley, the lower fix point and rocker can be replaced by a groove:
Using such a groove opens up a large number of possibilities, as the groove does not need to be a circular segment.
Even when using rockers and bars, grooves can be used as an additional support, making a mechanism robuster.

## Dimensions

In the original paper, not all dimensions are given.
As the drawing in the paper are to scale, the missing dimensions can be measured from the drawing:
Note that any error in the dimension is my (the author of the book) fault. Before making statements about the mechanism, consult the original paper by Shigley and if in doubt try to optimize the linkage for your use case.
* ↑ Shigley, Joseph E. “The Mechanics of Walking Vehicles: A Feasibility Study.” University of Michigan Department of Mechanical Engineering. 1960.
* ↑ as seen in this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mGOled86Sjo
# Comparison of crank based leg mechanism/Dimensions
### Dimension

* Extra simple walker
* Plantigrade machine
* Dimensions of the plantigrade machine
* Jansen Linkage
* Ghassaei Linkage
* TrotBot
* Walking Mechanism with Groove
* Strider Linkage
For the klann linkage, please see Klann_linkage#examples
Note that the Ghassaei linkage dimensions are based page 79 of the thesis, not the figure on the homepage.
* ↑ http://www.instructables.com/id/Extra-simple-walking-mechanism/
* ↑ https://www.diywalkers.com/trotbot-optimizer.html
* ↑ based on Shigley, Joseph E. “The Mechanics of Walking Vehicles: A Feasibility Study.” University of Michigan Department of Mechanical Engineering. 1960, Page 22 which can be found for e.g. under https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/f1bf/079112abb9e67cde49a98f033192cebc4299.pd
* ↑ http://www.amandaghassaei.com/files/thesis.pdf?page=83
* ↑ http://www.amandaghassaei.com/images/walker/dimensions.jpg
# Comparison of crank based leg mechanism/Intro
## in General

This comparison is limited to crank based walking mechanism. This removes a lot of linkages, but makes it easier to compare the mechanisms. Being cranked based, they might be tricky to construct and manufacture, but are easy to operate. All it needs is an engine/motor connected to the crank.
In the literature, crank-based mechanisms can also be found as Single deegre of Freedom (SDOF) mechanism.
Crank based mechanism have some disadvantages. Namely: Usually, stride length and height can not be adjusted. Also, the mechanism must be designed for static walking.
If not noted otherwise, the linkage can also be driven backwards, allowing the robot/mechanism to reverse.
For comparison, all mechanisms are normalized to a stride length of 1.
The simulation run with 10 Deg. per Step, meaning 36 steps per revolution.
First we will compare one leg of each mechanism. Next we will compare how those linkages become a vehicle/robot. Note that not all designs are proven in practice.
The comparison here is mainly based on simulation/calculation as a planar mechanism.
As it is a comparison, the book shall focus on comparing, basic theory as required for comparison. The full discussion on specifics should be done on Wikipedia or Wikibooks. The exception are very simple mechanism that for them shelf are not wikipedia relevant.
The book/article Klann linkage is a companion book, as the Klann Linkages has some complexity, but as of now did not have a good and easy to read (online) articles.
Note that the history of leg mechanism is linked to the history of straight line mechanism.

## references

* ↑ http://www.tcsme.org/Papers/Vol36/Vol36No4Paper2.pdf
* ↑ http://mspace.lib.umanitoba.ca/handle/1993/3922
* ↑ http://siddharthswaminathan.in/files/WalkingMechanism.pdf
# Comparison of crank based leg mechanism/Animation
### Animation

This animation are made with the assumption, that the fastes leg/foot dictates the speed of the whole mechanism.

## References

* ↑ http://www.instructables.com/id/Extra-simple-walking-mechanism/
# Comparison of crank based leg mechanism/Jansen linkage Modifications
### Wrong Angle / Missing measurement / Tilt

* Strandbeest with correct dimensions a = 38.0 l = 7.8 locus correct and grounded
* Strandbeest with incorrect dimensions a = 38.0 l = 0 locus extraged and tilted
* Strandbeest with incorrect dimensions a = 38.79 l = 0 locus correct, but tilted
Examples:
* Klann R & D, Joe Klann, Jansen Linkage - Klann Linkage Comparison
** https://web.archive.org/web/20160304035711/http://www.mechanicalspider.com/comparison.html
* Adam Savage's One Day Builds: Pedal-Powered Strandbeest!
** https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G96YQQ7vW8w?t=740
** https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G96YQQ7vW8w?t=1018
Note that the examples are not to mock the creators for their mistake, but praising them for sharing their experience so that we all can learn from them.
This mistake is made more likely by speaking about the eleven magic numbers instead of the 13 magic number.
(There are elven rods, but the two fixed points are a and l apart from each other)

### Triangle

Traditionally, the leg is formed by just using rods:
When manufacturing from flat stock like paper or wood, realizing that that one leg can also be constructed from 2 triangles and 5 rods can simplify the assembly and make the mechanism more robust
here some practical examples:
* Leg mechanism made from card board
* Mini Strandbeest

### Model ready for 3D-Printing

A fully-parametric strandbeest implemented in OpenSCAD, with assembly instructions, is available for 3D printing.

### Using Rod of the same length

f=39,4 and c=39,3 are so close in length, that using rods of the same length can simplify the assembly without affecting the gait to much.
Note that in practice, the whole mechanism as play and flex, undergrounds are not perfectly flat and lengths and holes have manufacturing inducted errors.

## References

* ↑ https://ethanzuckerman.com/2007/03/08/theo-jansens-strandbeests/
* ↑ Linda Leinen (26 September 205). "Theo Jansen: Walking on the Mild Side".
* ↑ A. Matulich (23 May 2020). "Building the Strandbeest".
# Comparison of crank based leg mechanism/Walking
## static walking vs. dynamic walking

As stated before, a cranked based walking mechanism must or at least must/should be able for static walk.
Here is an example for static walking and dynamic walking:
* a galloping horse is an example for dynamic walking. There are phases, where no foot is in contact with the ground.
* at least two feets are always touching the ground.
As the machine has to start from a stand still and can not adjust it´s stride during walking, static walking is the only viable option.
# Computer Animation

Many people are interested in the field of computer animation. Some see animations on the web, such as the excellent political satires on jibjab.com, and wonder how they could create their own. Others with an interest in film wonder if this new field could help their own amateur film-making efforts (even if they don't expect to be able to create The Incredibles on their home PC).
The field is attractive as a hobby to many creative amateurs, however it can quickly become discouraging due to the relative scarcity of introductory material, and the steep learning curve. This wikibook is intended to act as a gathering point for information on the subject currently scattered around wikipedia.

## Table of Contents

* Computer Generated Imagery
    Some background and history.
* What You Should Know About Copyright
    Why copyright is an important consideration before you start.
* Getting Started
    Equipment and software.
* Types Of Animation
    File type rather than genre.
# Computer Go/GTPv2

A useful webpage for the gtp protocol is: http://www.lysator.liu.se/~gunnar/gtp/
It has the full specification and information regarding the protocol and how it works and is available in different formats (HTML, LaTeX, Postscript, PDF)
-Josh
# Computer Go
## Writing Software to Play the Ancient Game of Go

Go is a strategic, two-player game that originated in ancient China thousands of years ago. It is popular throughout East Asia, and is gaining popularity among computer programmers because of its extraordinary complexity. Whereas the top chess-playing computer programs are now better than the top human grand masters, the best Go-playing computer programs currently in existence can be defeated even by amateur Go players.
The rules of Go are simple, but the strategies complex; the sheer number of legal moves at any point in the game make programming an effective opponent a daunting task. This book endeavors to help the novice who is beginning to write software to play the ancient game of Go, as well as to provide a useful resource to those already skilled in the art.

## The Go Community

It is becoming very common for Go players to use the Internet to meet, discuss games, and play one another. Many strong players now regularly play Go online. There is also a growing community of people who write Go software programs, with regular competitions and tournaments between the various Go-playing engines. See How Do I Find Other Programs To Play Against?

## Where Do I Start?

The best place to start is with the rules of Go. Once you are comfortable with the rules, you may want to play a few games yourself. At that point you can begin with whichever chapter of this book you find most interesting:
* Writing a Go Engine: the innards of a Go-playing program
* Writing a GTP Engine: the protocol that allows to programs to play Go against each other
* Writing an SGF Parser: the file format in which Go games are stored
* Writing a Go GUI: the way humans interact with a Go-related program

## Miscellaneous Resources

* Developer Resources
* Open source code
* GNU Go
* Utilities
* Mailing Lists
# Computer Go/GNU Go

GNU Go is an open-source Go-playing program that consistently achieves a rank of 8k-9k on popular Go servers. Examining how it works can be useful for those wanting to program their own Go engine.
http://www.gnu.org/software/gnugo/gnugo.html