Author: Uri Blass
Date: 04:52:15 09/19/02
Go up one level in this thread
On September 19, 2002 at 07:41:27, James Swafford wrote: >On September 19, 2002 at 03:28:44, Severi Salminen wrote: > >>>Or maybe I define a qnode as a node at which the children come >>>from a limited qsearch OR the node is a leaf. :) There are no >>>standards, I'm afraid. >> >>No standards of course, but I believe the most do as I described. So a leaf node >>is a qnode only if reached _from_ qsearch(). So if you do a 1 ply search in >>initial position, there are no qnodes at all: all 20 leaf nodes are normal >>nodes. You should also (if you want) follow these lines so the numbers would be >>more comparable. > >If that's in fact the de facto standard I'd be inclined to switch. >I don't know if that's the case, though (no offense), as I haven't >looked at anybody else's source in quite a while. (Not that there's >anything wrong with that.) > >Are you sure your definition is "standard"? >-- >James Severi's definition is the only logical definition because otherwise the number of the qnodes is meaningless. The number of the qnodes is supposed to tell you how much nodes you search more because of qsearch. I do not care about the number of qnodes if it is not the meaning of it. Uri
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.