Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Do I need a Tree size reduction?

Author: Antonio Dieguez

Date: 22:35:25 10/11/99

Go up one level in this thread


On October 11, 1999 at 23:53:38, Josh Levine wrote:

>searching...
>no book move.
>score: +0.28, nodes: 21, depth: 1
>Best: Nc3
>score: +0.00, nodes: 61, depth: 2
>Best: Nc3 Nc6
>score: +0.28, nodes: 525, depth: 3
>Best: Nc3 Nc6 Nf3
>score: +0.00, nodes: 1435, depth: 4
>Best: Nc3 Nc6 Nf3 Nf6
>score: +0.22, nodes: 11004, depth: 5
>Best: Nc3 Nc6 Nf3 Nf6 d4
>score: +0.00, nodes: 38137, depth: 6
>Best: Nc3 Nc6 Nf3 Nf6 d4 d5
>Score: +0.00, NPS: 17346., depth: 7, table use: 8492
>Score: +0.00, Time: 20.009, NPS: 17346., depth: 7, table use: 8492
>pv: Nc3 Nc6 Nf3 Nf6 d4 d5 Bg5
>stopping...
>.score: +0.24, nodes: 347084, depth: 7
>Best: Nc3 Nc6 Nf3 Nf6 d4 d5 Bg5
>
>This is a search done at the root position.  What do other people get for tree
>size and table use?  I think I should be able to finish depth 7 even at a meager
>20000 NPS (nodes are places where Eval is called).
>Thanks for your responses, and if this is abnormal, I'll post my methods for
>interpretation.

As I know, that amount of nodes is not abnormal if you dont do unsafes pruning
or selectivity or null move or whatever.

nodes are the places where the eval is called? sure? I thunk each call to the
search function was a node.

>Josh Levine

bye bye Josh...



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.