Computer Chess Club Archives




Subject: Re: Branching factor, make me confuse more that ever.

Author: Tom Kerrigan

Date: 14:56:20 04/03/00

Go up one level in this thread

On April 03, 2000 at 15:33:48, Robert Hyatt wrote:

>On April 03, 2000 at 00:06:03, Tom Kerrigan wrote:
>>On April 01, 2000 at 13:38:00, leonid wrote:
>>>Maybe you could take me out of my endless confusion about "branching factor".
>>>Confusion come from the way that you can compare two different games. Would like
>>>your help in finding useful numbers about this factor.
>>You are taking a totally different approach to computer chess than everybody
>>else in the world.
>>You are driving a boat when everybody else is driving a car.
>>This is fine, but the problem is that you are insisting on comparing your boat
>>to everybody's car. You're trying to equate sail size to wheel diameter. It's
>>possible, but it couldn't be more useless.
>>Your program does not do quiescence searches, it does not do extensions, it
>>probably doesn't do iterative deepening, etc. Comparing your program to other
>>programs which DO have these features is not productive.
>>Until you decide to add these features, you should simply concentrate on
>>improving your program and not worry about what other people are doing.
>>If you have to know, here's how you can compute your branching factor: count how
>>many moves you search at each node. Divide by the number of nodes.
>That's not 'branching factor'.  that is "effective branching factor".  Because
>at many nodes you search 1 branch, but there are obviously many more moves there
>that _could_ be searched...
>this has been a source of confusion almost forever...

So it's totally correct for me to say that Crafty's branching factor is 38.


This page took 0.01 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.