Author: Ralf Elvsén
Date: 16:08:10 02/27/01
Go up one level in this thread
On February 27, 2001 at 11:48:24, TEERAPONG TOVIRAT wrote:
>I'm sorry for not giving more details in my last post. It was quite late at
>night and there were a lot of things on my head .
>In my last messege,I suggested we write a new pseudosearch().
>And call it recursively to count number of visiting nodes then compare
>with our real search().
>
> int pseudosearch(depth)
> { nodes++;
> if(depth==0) return
> generate(); // 1 time
> for( iteration X times) // we can change X here to see what happen to nodes
> { makemove();
> x= pseudosearch(depth-1);
> unmake();
> }
> return
> }
>
>And, from this function ,as you might guess if you let X=8.5 ,your total nodes
>would be 8.5^depth (or ply). That is why I think it's a wrong number.
>We can expect total searching nodes should be around 4^ply
>(4=branching factor).
>I may be wrong. I just try to learn every day especially computer chess.:)
>
>Teerapong
Aha, uhum... That's what you had in mind? You are doing it
recursively. I thought you would just loop over one position.
But I see no fundamental difference other than a probably more
representative sampling.
It's late at night here as well now so let me just ask you this:
You will run this to test to speed of your movegen and makemove?
That's how I understood your original message.
I don't understand what you mean when you say this:
"And call it recursively to count number of visiting nodes then compare
with our real search()."
Count which nodes? Isn't it obvious how many you will visit?
What will you use that number for? Am I still missing something?
Ralf
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.