Without consulting the code, I'm guessing the following: For money games the cubeless equity is a fairly well defined thing, as the relative cost of a point, gammon or backgammon is independent of the cube value. For matches it is different. Suppose the there is a double/take in a game in your example game. Now, should the cubeless equity of such a game be calculated with the cube at two or one. Neither is probably a very good idea, but I'm guessing that the evaluation is done with the cube at two, which explains the difference in numbers that you are observing.
The bottom line: don't use the CL equities for matches. Christian. On Sun, Dec 14, 2008 at 7:59 PM, <[email protected]> wrote: > I have a question concerning the cubeless equity derived from cubeful > rollouts > > > > Date: Dezember 14, 2008 > Move number 3: X to play 32 > > GNU Backgammon Position ID: mGdrBgDLzInBAA > Match ID : cImpACAAAAAA > +24-23-22-21-20-19------18-17-16-15-14-13-+ O: somebody > | O O | | X O O O O X | 2 points > | O O | | X O O O X | > | O | | | > | O | | | > | | | | > | |BAR| |v 5 point match (Cube: 1) > | | | | > | | | | > | | | X | > | X X X | | X O | Rolled 32 > | X X X X | | X X O | 0 points > +-1--2--3--4--5--6-------7--8--9-10-11-12-+ X: You > Pip counts: O 124, X 120 > > * You moves 18/15*/13 > > > This is a cubeless rollout result: > > 1. Rollout 8/6 8/5 Eq.: -0,008 > 0,498 0,015 0,000 - 0,502 0,014 0,001 CL -0,008 > [0,001 0,001 0,000 - 0,001 0,001 0,000 CL 0,003] > Full cubeless rollout with var.redn. > 1296 games, Mersenne Twister dice gen. with seed 812588963 and > quasi-random dice > Play: 0-ply cubeful prune > Cube: 0-ply cubeful prune > 2. Rollout 18/15*/13 Eq.: -0,134 ( -0,127) > 0,464 0,174 0,005 - 0,536 0,174 0,009 CL -0,134 > [0,002 0,002 0,001 - 0,002 0,002 0,001 CL 0,006] > Full cubeless rollout with var.redn. > 1296 games, Mersenne Twister dice gen. with seed 812588963 and > quasi-random dice > Play: 0-ply cubeful prune > Cube: 0-ply cubeful prune > > > And this is a cubeful rollout result: > > 1. Rollout 18/15*/13 Eq.: +0,031 > 0,465 0,176 0,006 - 0,535 0,176 0,015 CL -0,025 CF +0,031 > [0,002 0,002 0,001 - 0,002 0,002 0,002 CL 0,006 CF 0,012] > Full cubeful rollout with var.redn. > 1296 games, Mersenne Twister dice gen. with seed 812585055 and > quasi-random dice > Play: 0-ply cubeful prune [expert] > Cube: 0-ply cubeful prune [expert] > 2. Rollout 8/6 8/5 Eq.: -0,009 ( -0,040) > 0,500 0,017 0,000 - 0,500 0,014 0,001 CL -0,001 CF -0,009 > [0,001 0,001 0,000 - 0,001 0,001 0,000 CL 0,003 CF 0,006] > Full cubeful rollout with var.redn. > 1296 games, Mersenne Twister dice gen. with seed 812585055 and > quasi-random dice > Play: 0-ply cubeful prune [expert] > Cube: 0-ply cubeful prune [expert] > > > > I know why we should not expect the w/g/bg breakdowns to be the same (with > the cubeful rollout being truncated in case of a double/pass), but anyway in > this case they are close. What I don't understand at all is why the cubeless > equity of 18/15*/13 differs so much in the cubeful and in the cubeless > rollout. > > > _______________________________________________ > 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
