Make the ULTIMATE evaluation chess script.

### **Weighted Positional and Tactical Evaluation Model (WPTEM)**

1. **Material Balance (Standard):**
   - Base factor, where pawns are valued as 1, knights and bishops as 3, rooks as 5, and the queen as 9.
   - Introduce adjustments for piece activity—an active rook on an open file may be worth more than a static one.

2. **Piece Mobility (Traditional + Custom Weight):**
   - Each piece’s movement is evaluated dynamically. More mobile pieces (with more legal moves) receive a positive evaluation, but with diminishing returns to avoid overemphasis on mobility alone.
   - Custom weight can be adjusted for different phases of the game. For example, bishops are typically stronger in the endgame compared to knights, so their mobility should be weighted higher in that phase.

3. **King Safety (Traditional + Aggressive Customization):**
   - Traditional engines often evaluate the safety of the king by pawn shields and piece proximity. In this method, you add a dynamic component:
     - **Aggressive King Positioning:** In the endgame, kings are evaluated positively when centralized or advanced. The evaluation prioritizes king activity when queens are off the board.

4. **Center Control (Weighted):**
   - Emphasize the control of central squares (e4, d4, e5, d5) more than a traditional engine would. These squares are weighted dynamically depending on the position. For example, knights controlling these squares are evaluated more highly in the middlegame.

5. **Piece Coordination (Custom Pairing Bonus):**
   - Reward the synergistic positioning of specific piece combinations (e.g., two rooks connected, queen and knight attack pairs). The idea is that strong piece collaboration is worth more than the individual value of each piece.

6. **Pawn Structure (Advanced Customization):**
   - This method weighs isolated, doubled, and backward pawns, but also introduces advanced pattern recognition of pawn islands and the potential for long-term weaknesses. Extra value is given to passed pawns and connected passed pawns, with emphasis on their ability to promote.

7. **Strategic Imbalances (Dynamic Positional Factors):**
   - Evaluate key positional imbalances, such as:
     - **Bishop vs. Knight:** Dynamic weighting depending on the board's openness and pawn structure.
     - **Space Advantage:** Reward players with more space but use diminishing returns to avoid an overvalued space lead in cramped positions.

8. **Custom Evaluation for Threats (Aggressive Style Adaptation):**
   - Incorporate a tactical vision that gives extra points for positions where tactical threats (forks, pins, skewers) can be made in a few moves, even if not immediately executable. This encourages sharp, aggressive play without relying solely on brute-force calculation.

9. **Opening Book & Endgame Tablebases (Efficiency for CPUs):**
   - Utilize a simplified opening book focused on high-quality mainlines up to 12 moves, and lightweight endgame tablebases for positions with fewer pieces, suitable for limited CPU power.

And:

### **Optimized Tactical Evaluation and Search Method (OTESM)**

1. **Selective Depth Extensions (Focus on Tactical Patterns):**
   - Extend the search depth **selectively** in positions where tactical motifs (forks, pins, skewers, checks) are present. Instead of evenly increasing search depth for all moves, target specific moves that involve captures, checks, and major threats.
   - For example, if a queen can deliver a check or if a knight is involved in a potential fork, extend the search deeper for these lines. 

2. **Pruning Techniques (Reducing Non-Tactical Paths):**
   - **Null Move Pruning:** Aggressively prune lines where a side moves without making a move (i.e., giving the opponent an extra turn). If a move is not immediately threatening, the search depth can be reduced. This is great for avoiding paths where there is no significant tactical activity.
   - **Late Move Reduction (LMR):** For moves that appear late in the move ordering (less promising moves), reduce the search depth. Moves that don't involve immediate tactical threats can be evaluated less deeply.

3. **Quiescence Search (Refining Search on Tactical Positions):**
   - After the main search, use a **quiescence search** to avoid the "horizon effect" (where the engine misses tactical threats just beyond the search depth). This focuses on evaluating only the "noisy" moves such as captures, checks, and threats. By allowing the engine to search beyond the standard depth only in tactical positions, it can better evaluate whether an immediate threat leads to a strong advantage or not.
   - **Tactical Focus:** Weight quiescence search heavily towards recaptures, checks, and any forced sequences.

4. **Killer Move Heuristic (Tactical Tuning):**
   - Use a **killer move table** to prioritize moves that have been highly effective in previous searches. Killer moves often lead to checkmates, significant material gain, or forcing continuations, and are more relevant for tactical play. This keeps the engine sharp and focused on potential knockout blows.
   - Increase the importance of tactical "killer moves" by maintaining a cache of such moves from similar positions encountered during the search.

5. **Tactical Pattern Recognition (Efficient CPU Usage):**
   - Use pre-coded **tactical pattern recognition** to quickly identify common tactics like discovered attacks, pins, forks, and back-rank threats. Once identified, increase the evaluation focus in those lines.
   - Instead of recalculating tactical motifs from scratch in every search iteration, apply fast pattern recognition to catch tactical opportunities early in the search.

6. **History Heuristic (Search Optimization):**
   - Use the **history heuristic** to bias the engine towards moves that have historically performed well in similar positions. Moves that have caused major material swings or resulted in tactical gains are given priority, speeding up the decision-making process and reducing unnecessary search space.

7. **Futility Pruning (Eliminate Useless Moves):**
   - If a move is not likely to change the evaluation by a significant amount (i.e., improve or worsen the position drastically), prune it from further consideration. For tactical optimization, moves that don't result in check, capture, or threats can often be skipped at shallower depths.

8. **Pawn Structure and Imbalances (Simplified for Tactics):**
   - While a highly tactical engine doesn't need to go deep into pawn structures, it can still recognize **imbalances** (e.g., a weak pawn that could be captured in a tactical sequence, or a passed pawn ready for promotion). However, limit the scope of positional evaluations to avoid wasting CPU resources on slower positional factors.

9. **Checkmate Patterns (Immediate Threats):**
   - Pre-load the engine with **known checkmate patterns** like back-rank mates, smothered mates, and basic mating nets. When one of these patterns arises, the engine can quickly identify them and give an immediate tactical evaluation boost, optimizing CPU cycles for quicker identification of winning tactics.

10. **Move Ordering Heuristics (Efficiency for CPU):**
   - Use advanced **move ordering** techniques to evaluate tactical moves first:
     - Captures (using the **MVV-LVA heuristic**: Most Valuable Victim - Least Valuable Attacker).
     - Checks.
     - Threats of major material gain (forks, skewers, etc.).
   - By evaluating tactical moves first, the engine avoids wasting time on less impactful moves and focuses on potential game-changing tactical shots.

11. **Parallel Search on Tactical Motifs (Multithreading for Average CPU):**
   - Even on an average CPU, optimize for **multithreaded searching**, where different threads can focus on different tactical motifs (e.g., one thread focuses on all checks, another on all captures). This allows the engine to explore multiple tactical avenues in parallel, increasing the chance of finding the best tactical shot in a given position.