Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 07:51:32 11/18/02
Go up one level in this thread
On November 18, 2002 at 00:55:35, Uri Blass wrote: >On November 17, 2002 at 22:31:31, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On November 17, 2002 at 21:12:53, Joel wrote: >> >>>Hey All, >>> >>>Thankyou to everyone who responded to my query regarding 'extracting bits from a >>>bitboard'. I think I will use some preprocessor code and use the bsf/bsr method, >>>otherwise falling back on my old method (I can play around with this part >>>later). >>> >>>My next question that follows is how do you guys measure nodes per second. I can >>>think of a quite a few ways of doing it myself, but I would prefer implementing >>>it in a way which lets me very confidently compare my results with others. >>> >>>Thanks, >>>Joel >> >> >>Every time you recursively call Search() or Quiesce(), increment a counter >>by one. That is counting nodes searched. Divide that by time used and you >>get a useful NPS value. > >The problem with this value is that you cannot compare it with other people > >I make and generate only legal moves so for me nodes are legal moves. >You make pseudo legal moves that may not be legal when the king is not in check >and another person may make pseudo legal move in every case. > >Today I update my nodes every time that I make a move that is not null move(I >could get higher nps if I update my nodes after making null moves). > >I have in movei pruning that is done after I make a move. >I can do this pruning after I call search(in the beginning of search) or before >I call search. > >By your definition I get different nps in both cases. > >Uri Depends. A node is a "position reached". If you prune _before_ making a move, then you didn't reach that position. If you make a move and then prune you _did_ reach a new position. Of course comparing nps between two programs is not particularly informative...
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.