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: >> >>>Hello! >>> >>>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. >> >>-Tom > > >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. -Tom
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.