Good or Very Good usually imply the move was less than obvious. If one
agree to this, then how about if a player finds a move that 0-ply
disagreed with, but that 2-ply agreed with (showing it was less than
obvious as 0-ply didn't find it either), it is marked as a Good Move.
And if the move is considerably better than what 0-ply had initially
planned it will be classified as Very Good. Ex:
31 - Player plays 8/5* 6/5
0-ply says it is a 0.030 mistake and one must play 13/9.
2-ply reverts this and says 8/5 6/5 is best.
If the equity difference, according to 2-ply, is better by 0.001 to
0.030, it is a "Good Move", and if it is better by 0.30 or up it is a
"Very Good" move. This would apply to any deeper analysis disproving a
previous verdict.
So if I run a 3-ply that puts my move ahead of the 2-ply before it, it
can change the classification of my move and make it a Very Good move
when it wasn't before. Or if a rollout agrees with my move over the
prevous 2-ply, then my move again is either called a "Good Move" or a
"Very Good Move".
Albert
-----Original Message-----
From: Joseph Heled [mailto:address@hidden
Sent: Sunday, August 17, 2003 11:52 PM
To: gnubg
Cc: Albert Silver
Subject: Re: [Bug-gnubg] Marked good
I took the simplistic approach that "good is anything that is not
bad",
which includes forced and can't move.
If you guys figure out another consistent and natural counting method,
I
will give it a look.
-Joseph
N.B implementation-wise it is sometimes not trivial - since you can
figure out the 'can't move' without analysis, but 'forced move'
requires
analysis at the moment. And currently we can have the case that only
part of the match is analyzed.
Albert Silver wrote:
Forced moves are marked "Good"?
Silverwind You
Checkerplay statistics:
Total moves 110 111
Unforced moves 92 82
Moves unmarked 0 0
Moves marked good 84 92
Albert
_______________________________________________
Bug-gnubg mailing list
address@hidden
http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-gnubg