Author: Russell Reagan
Date: 17:38:03 12/08/03
Go up one level in this thread
On December 08, 2003 at 20:27:33, Steven Edwards wrote: I like the NATS idea. >One plan is to categorize position difficulty based on > > d = log N d: difficulty N: node count to solution Would the method for counting nodes be standardized? Some count nodes differently than others. For instance, one might not count the nodes visited during a null-move search and instead count the root node from which that null-move search was performed as a single node. Some programs do a great deal more work per node. Maybe more than one metric should be used. I think time is a better one than nodes. Nodes seem dependent upon the design philosophy of the engine writer. The times would go down as hardware gets faster, but that is part of the point of test suites, to determine how computer chess has advanced, and hardware is a part of that equation.
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.