Author: Nathan Thom
Date: 20:45:06 03/06/06
Go up one level in this thread
On March 06, 2006 at 23:40:58, Stuart Cracraft wrote: >On March 06, 2006 at 23:36:22, Dann Corbit wrote: > >>On March 06, 2006 at 22:14:27, Nathan Thom wrote: >> >>>>>3. Search inefficiency (branching factor of a good program is definitely under >>>>>4) >>>> >>>> * My branching factor is about 2-3 for these kinds of positions. >>> >>>How are branching factors calculated? I get wildly different values at each ply >>>as each side usually has different numbers of moves available to them... and at >>>the root node, its always the full number of moves isnt it? >>> >>>e.g, for 8/6k1/6Pp/3r1P2/6K1/n3BP2/1p6/4R3 w - - 3 51 >>>I get branching factors at each ply of 26 2 20 4 16 3 13 3 10 >> >>The simplest and most accurate way to determine your branching factor is to >>divide the time to complete iteration N+1 by the time to complete iteration N >>(don't bother computing it if you had an interrupt halt calculations -- >>calculate it only if it finished naturally). > >That's what I do, then I average them all together for the current >iterative deepening 1-N set for the given search. > >After that I average all those averages together across a test suite >to get the final branching factor. > >The former are br= in my listing and the latter are bf= which is an ongoing >average of the averages. > >Stuart ahhh, that would be why mines so different. i actually keep track of the actual number of moves followed at each ply which to me is what branching factor means.
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.