Re: [Bug-gnubg] Re: Battle of the Bots

[Nardy Pillards]

No Jacoby rule AND no doubling cube?

Nardy

----- Original Message -----
From: "Joseph Heled" <address@hidden>
To: "gnubg" <address@hidden>
Cc: "Neil Kaz" <address@hidden>
Sent: Sunday, January 05, 2003 7:42 AM
Subject: [Bug-gnubg] Re: Battle of the Bots



Attached are 48 games played with gnu ply2. Please comment on the
mistakes which make it win 10% less games than SN 4. There must be
several here ...

-Joseph


Neil Kaz wrote:
> My 3ply/precise Snowie rollout has this position as having a cubeless
equity
> of .554 but my new GNU 2-ply rollout has the equity as about .785 and was
> winning the game 10% less from the backgame player's side.
>
> I'll run a full 1296 games 2ply overnight since this takes some time ( I
did
> 385 games in a couple of hours)
>
> This is a very straightforward position with all the skill on the backgame
> player's side and a good test of how well a bot can play a backgame.
>
> To do this rollout cubeless with GNU I need to do it by clicking on
analyse
> and then rollout (off course after setting the rollout and turning off
> Jacoby rule)
>
> ..neilkaz..
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Joseph Heled" <address@hidden>
> To: "Neil Kaz" <address@hidden>
> Cc: "Albert Silver" <address@hidden>; "'Joern Thyssen'"
> <address@hidden>; "'Øystein Johansen'" <address@hidden>
> Sent: Saturday, January 04, 2003 2:28 PM
> Subject: Re: Battle of the Bots
>
>
>
>
> Neil Kaz wrote:
>
>>By all means..I would use the Jacobs MET until someone, like myself can
>
> roll
>
>>out a better one. I trust that you guys will teach me how to make my own
>
> MET
>
>>as I obtain data.
>>
>>I want to use the new GNU version which is supposed to be superior in
>>backgames, but from rollouts I am doing of a very basic backgame where all
>>the skill is needed on the backgame player's side , it appears to be FAR
>>behind Snowie 4 or, perhaps I don't have the proper weights installed.
>
>
> Can you post the position and Snowie results please? I would not get too
>   concerned about one specific position, or even several. Also, play
> will be at 2 or 3ply, while rollouts usually are 0ply, and the error
> rate of 2ply (in crashed positions) is about half as far as I can tell.
>
> -Joseph
>
>
>>I am very confused with this "weight" stuff and wish there was a simple
>
> way
>
>>just to DL everything I need to run GNU at its highest strength.
>>
>>..neilkaz..
>>----- Original Message -----
>>From: "Albert Silver" <address@hidden>
>>To: "'Joern Thyssen'" <address@hidden>; "'Joseph Heled'"
>
> <address@hidden>;
>
>>"'Neil Kaz'" <address@hidden>
>>Cc: "'Øystein Johansen'" <address@hidden>
>>Sent: Saturday, January 04, 2003 12:26 PM
>>Subject: Battle of the Bots
>>
>>
>>Hi,
>>
>>As you may have seen (I'm sure Neil has), GammonVillage has
>>begun a series called the Battle of the Bots, in which Snowie, Jellyfish
>>and GNUBG will play matches. They realize no statistical info can be
>>obtained by this on which bot is stronger, and say so clearly, however,
>>hope to generate interesting discussions on key positions. The impartial
>>(cough!) judge of the errors will be Snowie 4's 3-ply analysis. I asked
>>about the settings, MET, version, and DB that would be used. Obviously
>>this hadn't been considered very deeply so was what I suggested. I
>>should add that they don't know it is me. My suggestion is the Jacobs
>>MET, and a 13 point DB to be built. What about the playing settings? I'm
>>running on an abysmally slo machine, but if they have decent hardware,
>>then I'd like to make a bold suggestion: some setup of move filters,
>>allowing at least 2-3 moves to be analyzed at GNU's 3-ply.
>>Here is what I've noticed in my experience with analyzing with
>>GNU: it analyzes at least 99% of the time the top 2-3 moves in its list
>>at 2-ply. It does change it's choice of best move with 3-ply a few
>>times. I can't estimate a percentage. The 3-ply evaluation is almost
>>always the same as its rollouts. Even the errors pointed out by Snowie 4
>>(and GNU points out errors by Snowie 4 too BTW) are corrected invariably
>>by its 3-ply. So: can anyone suggest a top-level 3-ply play (maybe only
>>analyzing 2-3 moves at 3-ply) that would be about the same speed as
>>Snowie 4's 3-ply which is very slow. They plan to use Snowie 4 in the
>>contest later, so that is the limit of the acceptable.
>>I can't even test this properly on my laptop, to which I'm
>>confined until I get a new motherboard, otherwise I would. Also could
>>you give me the exact script to develop the 13-point DB as well as the
>>expected size?
>>
>>Albert
>>
>>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: address@hidden
>>[mailto:address@hidden On Behalf Of
>>Joern Thyssen
>>Sent: Saturday, January 04, 2003 2:21 PM
>>To: Neil Kaz
>>Cc: Øystein Johansen; GnuBg Bug (E-mail)
>>Subject: Re: [Bug-gnubg] Re: Long GNU rollout results
>>
>>On Sat, Jan 04, 2003 at 10:40:36AM -0600, Neil Kaz wrote
>>
>>
>>>Thx everyone..I want to perfectly understand what GNU is doing in
>>
>>rollouts
>>
>>
>>>and how/why it is presenting the data like this. I hope to be 100%
>>
>>certain
>>
>>
>>>that GNU is doing everything like it is supposed. ..ie perfectly
>>
>>evaluating
>>
>>
>>>the plays and cubes according to match score.
>>
>>
>>gnubg always evaluate plays and cube according the current score and
>>cube in rollouts.
>>
>>Jørn
>>
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>Bug-gnubg mailing list
>>address@hidden
>>http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-gnubg
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>



----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----


> _______________________________________________
> Bug-gnubg mailing list
> address@hidden
> http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-gnubg
>