Hi Achim,

I guess you lostpasr of Bob's message ... what are  1D, 2C, 2D ?
Can you repost Bob's original message ?

MaX.

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 
11/08/2008 13:13:38:

> Hi folks,
> 
> I'm forwarding an e-mail by Bob Koca (he also tried to show me this 
> behavior of gnubg whwn we met in Monte Calro):
> 
> ***************************************************
>   Here is a summary of some of the weird behavior I?ve noticed when 
> doing rollouts involving noise. I suspect it may just be an issue of 
> something being done in a wrong order. I used a 1 point match, zero 
> skill position so the weakening of either player and the clicking of 
> cubeful on or off should not matter but it does. It is the latest 
> build which I just downloaded today.
> 
> In particular:
> 
>   Comparing 1A to 1C shows that if cubeful is on then weakening one 
> player can influence the result.
> 
>   Comparing 2C to 2D shows that if cubeful is off then determinsitc or 
> nondeterministic noise makes a difference. However this is not the 
> case if cubeful is on as can be seen from comparing 1C to 1D.
> 
>   On a related issue it would be nice for the rollout results to give 
> more data. For example
> 
>   Whether the databases were being used, what type of noise was used, 
> what MEQ was used. Basically every setting that is alterable seems 
> like it should be included in the summary.
> 
> Thanks for any help, Bob Koca
> 
> Player 1 = bobk Orange checkers on bottom
> Player 0 = gnubg White checkers on top
> 
> Rollout of 15 on ace vs. 15 on ace 1 point match with various settings:
> 
> All use no variance reduction,  1296 trials, quasi random dice,  no 
> bearoff database, player 0 on roll,  and seed = 1,000,000
> 
> 1)  Using CUBEFUL ON
> A)  expert  with cubeful eval checked vs  expert with cubeful eval 
checked
>      win% of  .658951   and s.d of .013173
> B)  expert with cubeful eval off vs expert with cubeful eval off
> 
> same as A
> 
> C)  advanced (.015 det noise and cubeful eval)  vs expert
>      win % of .592607 and s.d of .011854
> ***************************************************
> 
> Ciao
> 
> Achim
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Bug-gnubg mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-gnubg
_______________________________________________
Bug-gnubg mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-gnubg

Reply via email to