Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Alpha-beta question

Author: Robert Hyatt

Date: 07:36:59 07/13/02

Go up one level in this thread


On July 13, 2002 at 01:38:49, Russell Reagan wrote:

>I have a question about alpha-beta. My understanding is that with perfect move
>ordering, you can get your branching factor down to the square root of the
>min-max branching factor. I did a few walk throughs of small trees using
>alpha-beta because I wanted to "see" what the tree looked like (where cutoffs
>occured), and I don't find this to be the case. I did a simple ternary tree walk
>through, and these are my numbers:
>
>Depth=1 : 4 nodes
>Depth=2 : 9 nodes
>Depth=3 : 49 nodes
>Depth=4 : 132 nodes
>
>Using a min-max search the branching factor should be 3. The branching factor
>for each of these depths was 2.22, 2.45, and 2.69 (which looks to be approaching
>3 with added depth). The square root of 3 is 1.73, so am I misinterpreting what
>I heard about the branching factor and alpha-beta?


Your formula is wrong.  The correct formula is

N = W ^ floor(D/2) + W ^ ceil(D/2)
>

Now, what is N?

It is the number of _terminal_ positions assuming a fixed depth search
where every node has exactly W moves to search.

IE for pure minimax, N=W^2.  If you have 5 moves at the root, 5 moves at
each successor position, you have 25 terminal positions.  If you want to
compute the total nodes within the tree, you have to sum the counts for
D=1, D=2, ..., D=N.




>In other words...If your min-max branching factor is N, then does using
>alpha-beta with perfect move ordering give you the square root of N as the
>branching factor, or is that the lowest possible limit of the branching factor?
>


the usual shortcut in the formula I gave you is that for D=even, you
can replace it by

N = 2 * W^(D/2)

W^(D/2) is basically sqrt(W^D)

note that 2 factor that must be accounted for also...

Notice also that a chess tree _never_ has a "constant branching factor" it
is dynamic throughout the tree.




>If I understand this all correctly, that means that in chess a branching factor
>below about 6 is not possible without using forward pruning (using alpha-beta)?
>How much will PVS lower the branching factor with no forward pruning?

That is essentially correct.  To get down to the 2-3-4 values we see today,
requires some sort of selectivity.




>
>Thanks very much for your replies.
>
>Russell



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.