Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 10:55:45 10/06/99
Go up one level in this thread
On October 06, 1999 at 13:34:59, Steve Maughan wrote: >Bas > >> >>First: are you sure you don't doublecount nodes? > >I'm not double counting. > >>If you put Nodes++ on top of ab and Qnodes++ on top of qsearch, then you >>doublecount the depth = 0 nodes. Because you count em in the normal search *and* >>the qsearch. Therefore, before you go into the qsearch do a qnodes--. >> >>Counted that way qnodes should be a smal fraction of total nodes. It depends >>also on the position. And according to my experience the use of nullmove worsens >>that rate, because normal nodes get pruned at the cost of extra qsearches. >>Without null I see qrates of 10-20% and *with* nullmove it is more like 50%. > >I can't see how the ratio of QNodes:NormalNodes can go below 1:1 (eg 10-20%) as >each NormalNode must give rise to at least one QNode. Where am I going wrong? > nowhere... you are exactly right. but then those particular q-nodes are not optional, while any below those qnodes are. There is where you can save... but you won't get below 1:1 counting like you are. An alternative is to count internal nodes (depth > 0) as nodes, leaf nodes (depth == 0) as leaves, and the rest as qsearch nodes. the latter is the only one you can control... >>In any case 5:1 is certainly not what it should be, at least not if you do a >>simple qsearch without checks etc. A way to improve that rate is skipping losing >>captures. Also if there are serious errors in movesorting the qrate can go way >>up. > >I'm only doing good captures in the QSearch - hmmm, I'll have another play >around > >Thanks anyway!! > > >> >>Regards, >>Bas Hamstra.
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.