Re: [Bug-gnubg] Use of Two-Sided DB in matchesIt seems to me, that where exact 
figures are there that must apply based on the score and cube value, as in this 
position, they reaaly should be used.
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Michael Petch 
  To: Neil Robins ; [email protected] 
  Sent: Saturday, September 05, 2009 6:15 AM
  Subject: Re: [Bug-gnubg] Use of Two-Sided DB in matches



  Because Gnugb plays based on the score and cube value (When in Match play). 
When it evaluates it doesn't blindly use the 2 sided bearoff database because 
the static values the 2 sided database don't account for score by itself. 
Jankowski's forumlas are applied to the values that  come from the DB and the 
eval continues. The bigger question is, is Jankowski's formula at fault in how 
we use it. 

  I don't see this as a bug still. But it doesn't mean the methodology has been 
verified.

  On 04/09/09 10:56 PM, "Neil Robins" <[email protected]> wrote:


    It has occurred to me that in a position like this previously discussed one:

    http://www.bgonline.org/forums/webbbs_config.pl?noframes;read=47213

    GNU Backgammon  Position ID: gwEAQCoAAAAAAA
                     Match ID   : cAmgACAAGAAA
     +13-14-15-16-17-18------19-20-21-22-23-24-+     O: gnubg
     |                  |   | O              O | OOO 2 points
     |                  |   | O              O | OO  
     |                  |   |                  | OO  
     |                  |   |                  | OO  
     |                  |   |                  | OO 
    v|                  |BAR|                  |     5 point match (Cube: 1)
     |                  |   |                  | XX 
     |                  |   |                  | XX  
     |                  |   |                  | XX  
     |                  |   |                  | XX  On roll
     |                  |   | X  X  X     X    | XXX 3 points
     +12-11-10--9--8--7-------6--5--4--3--2--1-+     X: Neil

    The MWC chance following Double/Take is directly obtainable from the 
Two-Sided Database. Doubling produces an automatic redouble so the situation is 
in effect cubeless.
    The DB gives Cubeless equity: +0.4707.

    Therefore where x = MWC/100
    x - (1 - x) =  0.4707
    x = 0.73535
    MWC = 73.535% after Double/Take
    This is in very close agreement with the XG rollout.

    Is there any reason GNU analysis cannot use this exact method?

    I feel I still get complete nonsense here with the latest windows build.

    7-ply cubeless MWC  67.39% (Money:  +0.387)
      0.694 0.000 0.000 - 0.306 0.000 0.000
    Cubeful equities:
    1. No double            70.06%
    2. Double, pass         75.08%  (  5.01%)
    3. Double, take         69.36%  ( -0.70%)
    Proper cube action: No double, take (12.3%)

    It also sure worries me to get rollout results that are quite certainly 
wrong.

    Rollout details:
    Centered 1-cube:
      0.728 0.000 0.000 - 0.272 0.000 0.000 CL  68.25% CF  70.66%
     [0.000 0.000 0.000 - 0.000 0.000 0.000 CL   0.00% CF   0.00%]
    Player gnubg owns 2-cube:
      0.732 0.000 0.000 - 0.268 0.000 0.000 CL  81.71% CF  73.16%
     [0.000 0.000 0.000 - 0.000 0.000 0.000 CL   0.00% CF   0.00%]
    Full cubeful rollout with var.redn.
    129600 games, Mersenne Twister dice gen. with seed 865036646 and 
quasi-random dice
    Play:  2-ply cubeful prune [world class]
    keep the first 0 0-ply moves and up to 8 more moves within equity 0.12
    Skip pruning for 1-ply moves.
    Cube: 2-ply cubeful prune [world class]


----------------------------------------------------------------------------
    _______________________________________________
    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