Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Low number of beta cuts

Author: Bernd Nürnberger

Date: 02:32:10 02/04/06

Go up one level in this thread


On February 04, 2006 at 04:42:14, Vasik Rajlich wrote:

>On February 04, 2006 at 04:18:58, Bernd Nürnberger wrote:
>
>>On February 04, 2006 at 03:56:09, Vasik Rajlich wrote:
>>
>>>On February 04, 2006 at 03:21:12, Bernd Nürnberger wrote:
>>>
>>>>Hello,
>>>>
>>>>I have a question concerning the rate of beta cuts. My program prunes the tree
>>>>by doing a beta cut at about 5-10% of all nodes. This seems rather low to me.
>>>>Thus most moves that were generated are actually made. Nethertheless I am
>>>>getting rather low node counts and a mediocre first cut rate: for WAC (pos
>>>>1-300) at depth 8, my program searches about 69 M nodes with a first cut rate of
>>>>88%.
>>>>
>>>>Now to the question: is a cut rate of 5..10% common?? I often heard that most
>>>>moves generated are nether done because of beta cuts. That's not the case in my
>>>>program.
>>>>For WAC (depth 8) 88 M nodes are generated and 69 M nodes are done !
>>>>
>>>>Configuration:
>>>>- Hash Table (1 M entries, deep/new two-level replacement)
>>>>- Razoring/(Extended) Futility Pruning
>>>>- Null Move (rather aggressive)
>>>>- Move Ordering:
>>>>   x   hash move   (IID)
>>>>   x   winning + equals caps  (by SEE, only x-rays capturer)
>>>>   x   killer 1 / killer 2
>>>>   x   non-caps (history heuristics)
>>>>   x   losing caps
>>>>- PVS / aspiration search
>>>>- QS (prunes rather aggresively using SEE)
>>>>- plain vanilla eval (mat + pc-sq + boni/penality for castlings)
>>>>
>>>>Any comments appreciated :-)
>>>>
>>>>Bernd
>>>
>>>In a classical search without razoring-type stuff you'll fail high at well over
>>>90% of nodes, and will need much fewer than 69M nodes to do 8 iterations.
>>>
>>>It's possible you have the alpha-beta logic mixed up. You might want to step
>>>through a sample variation move by move. For this the "Chant" tool (advertised
>>>here from the search engine page) is quite handy, it's what I use.
>>>
>>>Vas
>>
>>Hello Vas,
>>
>>I don't think that 69 M nodes for 300 positions to depth 8 is way too much.
>>After disabling null move and razoring/futility pruning, I am getting
>>98% average first cuts at WAC positions 1-10 (depth 8) while getting
>>24% beta cuts on average. With null move the it's 91% / 4% and with
>>null move and razoring/fut. it's 90% / 7%.
>>
>>So the first cut rate is good with null moves disabled, but the total beta cut
>>rate is somewhat low. Did you mean, that the total beta cut rate should be
>>over 90% or just the first cuts??
>>
>>Bernd
>
>Aha, now I understand what you mean.
>
>69M for all 300 positions sounds ok.
>
>Your first cut rates sound right. They will drop further if you are more
>selective at the leaves (ie. more razoring).
>
>Re. what you call beta cut rate, I have never measured this. Offhand, I'd guess
>that it should be way over 90%. The vast majority of program nodes where any
>moves are generated are depth == 1 fail-high nodes where the first move causes a
>cut.
>
>Vas

I see. Probably I have some really nasty bug. Even in Q-search I only get a beta
cut at about 1/3 of the nodes. Curiously most PVs looks reasonable and I get
about 270 WAC positions solved at 5s. So alpha-beta is not all mixed up.

Thanks for your comments...

Bernd



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.