If someone where to put several 10's of positions and remark on the complexity we may have a better place to start discussing. I was thinking about the moves being different, but it may be that positions may work as well. Doubles are especially interesting because of the greater number of possible moves.
-Joseph On Fri, Sep 4, 2009 at 7:59 AM, Michael Depreli<[email protected]> wrote: > Yes I agree. > Doesn't a neural net like a brain take in all the different aspects of a > position and weight them and come up > with equities and then rank them? > So is there a way to extract from the weights of the net a measure of how > many different factors make up the overall equity? > In the old builds you used to be able to call up the evaluator for the > contact net and it would show you all the weightings. > Depending say how different these weightings were for plays that were close > in equity could determine how complex a position was no? > There are 22 different weights displayed when I call up the evaluator. (I > hope I've got that techincally correct). > Let's just say for simplicity sake for one position there are 2 moves and 20 > of the weights are identical and only 2 different and in another > position 15 are identical and 7 different then that would be more complex. > > Michael > > > > > > >> From: [email protected] >> Date: Fri, 4 Sep 2009 07:27:59 +1200 >> Subject: Re: [Bug-gnubg] Measuring Complexity >> To: [email protected] >> CC: [email protected] >> >> I think it is not an easy one. My personal view is that a position is >> "complex" if there are several *different* top moves which are very >> close in equity. Now it all hangs on what "different" means :) >> >> -Joseph >> >> On Thu, Sep 3, 2009 at 11:13 PM, Michael >> Depreli<[email protected]> wrote: >> > I posted this on BGO: >> > Has anyone ever tried to tackle the subject of measuring complexity in >> > backgammon? Firstly you could take out moves / cube actions "that are >> > completely unimportant". You include opening moves and maybe even >> > replies >> > amongst those? After that maybe you could use the move filters within BG >> > software to assign a value. So let's say using gnubg analysis no plays >> > get >> > analysed at 2-ply as it's trivial then that move gets discarded. After >> > that >> > you could assign some kind of values based on how many moves and how big >> > an >> > equity difference they are away from the best play at 2-ply to reach a >> > figure and divide it by the total plays. I'm no mathematician so >> > wouldn't >> > know how to weight these factors etc. Any thoughts or does no one really >> > care? >> > >> > Michael >> > >> > ________________________________ >> > Have more than one Hotmail account? Link them together to easily access >> > both. >> > _______________________________________________ >> > Bug-gnubg mailing list >> > [email protected] >> > http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-gnubg >> > >> > > > ________________________________ > Add other email accounts to Hotmail in 3 easy steps. Find out how. _______________________________________________ Bug-gnubg mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-gnubg
