Author: Uri Blass
Date: 07:41:04 03/29/04
Go up one level in this thread
On March 29, 2004 at 10:17:18, martin fierz wrote: >aloha! > >i was discussing this somewhere in a thread, but thought i'd like to make this >question more visible in the hope of getting a good answer: > >everybody knows that with plain alpha-beta, a fixed number of moves N per node, >and perfect move ordering a search to depth D needs > >nodes(depth) = sqrt(N)^(D/2) nodes. > >with absolutely imperfect move ordering it needs > >nodes(depth) = N^(D) nodes. > >a typical chess program gets something like 90% move ordering in the sense that >if a cutoff move exists, it will search it as first move in 90% of all cases. >here's my question: > >can anybody give an estimate for nodes(depth) as function of this move ordering >parameter? obviously, this would also depend on when you find the best move in >those cases where you don't find it first. any kind of model is acceptable, e.g. >you always find it on 2nd, always on sqrt(N)th, always last, at a random number, >whatever. i'm just interested in the general behavior of nodes(depth) as a >function of the cutoff-%age. > >i'd be extremely surprised if nobody ever estimated this, so: has any of you >ever seen or calculated such numbers, and if yes, what do they look like? > >and is there any theory how this would apply to a modern chess program with >nullmove and extensions instead of the plain A/B framework above? > >basically this question of course means: do you really gain anything tangible >when improving your MO from say 90% to 92%? > >cheers > martin This is not simple to find how much I get by improving move order because my history based pruning is also different if my order of moves is better. Speed comparison of getting the same depth may be misleading because with different pruning you may get different results in the same depth. 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.