Author: leonid
Date: 04:19:53 09/20/99
Go up one level in this thread
On September 19, 1999 at 22:10:39, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On September 19, 1999 at 21:51:12, leonid wrote: > >>Please, say briefly what can reduce the "branching factor". I hope >>that something very simple I am missing in this aspect. My branching factor >>is only reason to feel me humiliated about my game. Maybe different logic >>lead to different "factor"? Do somebody came through the similer experience? >>And if it was so, what was the reason that you found? >> >>Thanks, >>Leonid. > > >There is only one way to reduce the 'branching factor'... that is to use a >purely selective search algorithm, where you throw out moves at every ply >without searching them at all. IE alpha/beta reduces the branching factor >from about 38 to sqrt(38). > >You can reduce the 'effective branching factor' by using null-move, or any other >idea that selectively reduces the search depth for selected branches... I use alpha-beta already (found it some 8 month ago) and do my move ordering after the material advantage that each move give. I use also the best moves from the previous searches. But how about the null move? I never used it for one simple reason, my idea is that null move give you the speed but make you loose the precision from your search. In other words, null move is good way for speeding the game but lead sometime to wrong moves. True or not true? Leonid.
This page took 0.01 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.