Author: David Rasmussen
Date: 11:19:27 11/26/02
Go up one level in this thread
On November 26, 2002 at 11:56:59, Sune Fischer wrote: >On November 26, 2002 at 11:38:40, David Rasmussen wrote: > >>On November 26, 2002 at 10:28:24, Sune Fischer wrote: >> >>> >>>You must have some extension that goes mad, like a threat extension or >>>something. I get around 55% qnodes, so you are right it is high but not _that_ >>>high. >>> >> >>An extension? They're Q-nodes, and I don't "extend" in Q-search. > >I know, but you might have some extension that guides the position into >something extremely tactical. Doesn't sound logical, but who knows if it's >possible in a rare situation. > Maybe. Sounds odd though. I don't see this kind of behavior usually. > >>00:00:12.47 6313kn 07/10/21 --------------------------------------------------- >>00:00:28.12 14Mn 08/11/22 6/48 19. Rae1 >> >> Time used: 00:00:30.00 >> nps: 497701 nodes: 14936023 Q-nodes: 14513023 (97%) >> move order: 88% >> hash probes: 112554 hash hits: 26981 (23%) hash usage: 2% >> pawn hash probes: 14816435 pawn hash hits: 14807848 (99%) >> EGTB probes: 0 EGTB hits: 0 (0%) > >normal nodes: 14936023 - 14513023 = 432000 > >So thats: 14513023 / 432000 >= 33 !? > >That's more than 33 captures per leaf node, that's a lot I think. The 432000 are interior nodes and leaf nodes. Not all leaf nodes. But I guess that just makes it even worse. But then again, with 97% qnodes, this ratio has got to be extreme. The question is: why? >Are you sure you haven't reversed a sign on the move ordering of these captures? > I can't imagine so, since I haven't encountered something like this before, and my qsearch generally behaves nicely. If my move order was upside down, it would show always. /David
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.