And don't use OSR. This was good for bootstrapping in the old days, when CPU was much slower.
On Mon, 17 Jun 2019 at 19:33, Joseph Heled <[email protected]> wrote: > You have many independent runs, right? Why worry about multi-threading? > Divide the set into (say) 16 threads (or whatever makes sense for your CPU) > and run each set on another thread. > > -Joseph > > On Mon, 17 Jun 2019 at 19:28, Øystein Schønning-Johansen < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> Thanks for your input. I'm still thinking about this. >> I really cannot decide which rollout code to use. :-) >> >> - sagnubg is really good but I have to tweak it a bit to make it work. >> I'm also not sure it is multi-threading. >> - GNU Backgammon, for sure it is good, but I probably have to build some >> scripts to run this through. Indeed multi-threading seems to work. >> - My own little rollout code. It really works good, but when I add >> multi-threading with OpenMP, it really does not speed up at all. Getting >> this working is actually what I'm spending time on now. I'm really >> scratching my head. >> >> As you mention, the tool I posted some weeks ago can indeed be used for >> some of the positions. That was actually the main reason I created the tool >> in the first place. I think you are right. I have to start with the >> positions with a lot of checkers born off. I can probably sort out in a >> simple way. I should also only handle positions where gammon and backgammon >> are not a subject. I can probably handle those separately. >> >> -Øystein >> >> On Sun, Jun 16, 2019 at 10:33 PM Philippe Michel < >> [email protected]> wrote: >> >>> On Mon, Jun 10, 2019 at 02:49:26PM +0200, Øystein Schønning-Johansen >>> wrote: >>> >>> > I will try re-rolling out these positions. Do you have any experience >>> of >>> > how to do good rollouts of race positions? Good rollout settings for >>> race >>> > positions? >>> >>> When I re-rolled out the benchmarks I mostly used the settings that had >>> been used previously. I think I changed the rolloutLimit parameter >>> somehow (the number of alternatives included for checker plays). It is >>> currently set to 10 for doublets and 5 for other rolls. I don't remember >>> exactly what I did ; maybe it used to be 5 in all cases. >>> >>> I previously wrote it would be useful to have variance reduction in >>> sagnubg, but this is not very important since it does 0-plys rollouts >>> (VR works for them, but it is slow and simply doing more trials is about >>> as good in terms of SD vs. time used). Doing 7776 trials instead of 1296 >>> doesn't seem unrealistic. >>> >>> From the other parameters : >>> >>> s version 1.93 weights 1.00 moves2plyLimit 20 rolloutLimit 5 >>> nRollOutGames 1296 cubeAway 7 include0Ply 1 evalPlies 2 shortCuts 1 >>> osrGames 1296 osrInRoll 1 >>> >>> experimenting with osrInRoll set to 0 may be interesting. I dont know if >>> OSR >>> is used for speed or for accuracy... >>> >>> Another interesting thing to try, if it is practical, would be to use >>> the >>> software you mentionned a few weeks ago to calculate exact values. >>> >>> For instance, sort the positions by leading player's pipcount. Start >>> from the smallest ones with your software ; that should tackle the >>> hypergammon-like positions with few checkers and ideally the very >>> unbalanced ones where the trailer can only try to save the gammon. The >>> latter may well be misplayed in the current rollouts. >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> Bug-gnubg mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-gnubg >> >
_______________________________________________ Bug-gnubg mailing list [email protected] https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-gnubg
