Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Moves per position.

Author: Robert Hyatt

Date: 19:53:31 11/28/98

Go up one level in this thread


On November 28, 1998 at 16:49:25, Christophe Theron wrote:

>On November 28, 1998 at 14:25:45, Frank Phillips wrote:
>
>>Thanks. Order seems important .  Killer moves are a big help in
>>some positions.
>
>Yes. You should not find them to be a waste of time.
>
>
>>>>And on which planet? :)
>>Earth.
>
>Oh! So we are neighbours! :)
>
>
>>  If my question seemed strange put this down to inexperience.  This is my
>>first attempt.  But I thought that the number of moves that the search
>>considered out of each position?s (node?s) move list would be an important
>>performance indicator.  Mine averages around 9 in the middle game, which seems
>>high.
>
>I see. You are talking about the branching factor!
>
>To measure it, I think you should display the number of moves seen at the end of
>each iteration and compute the average of
>
>  nb_of_nodes(iteration N) / nb_of_nodes(iteration N-1)
>
>(the number of nodes of iteration N-1 is also counted in the number of nodes of
>iteration N)
>
>Notice that it is different depending if N is odd or even.
>
>For example you could average the result for iteration 7 and iteration 8 to have
>a better measure. Do this for a number of different positions to have an even
>better number.
>
>The measured branching factor should definitely be under 6.
>
>9 is way too high.
>
>Some good programs have a branching factor under 4. It is maybe the case of
>Crafty.
>
>
>>I got the impression from posts here that 2 or 3 is probably closer to
>>the norm?  My program manages about 7-8 ply (plus check and recapture
>>extensions, and quiescent search) in 10 seconds at about 80k nps.
>
>This does not sound too bad...
>
>
>>Crafty, at
>>twice this speed, goes disproportionately deeper.
>
>Really? Are you sure?
>
>
>>Something badly messed up I
>>guess.
>
>Compute your branching factor and you will get an idea.
>
>Maybe others compute it differently. I don't know if there is a "standard" way
>to compute it...
>
>
>    Christophe


I compute this as nodes(N)/nodes(N-1) where N does not include N-1's nodes.
or you can do this with time(N)/time(N-1) where the time for N is computed as
ending_time(N)-starting_time(N), for all iterations...

there you should get in the 2-4 range, with 4 being on the upper end of
acceptable... although there will always be positions where the branching
factor goes to 6-7-8 or even way higher, when move ordering is not so good
because of the dynamics of the position.



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.