Strangely enough, it now appears that hb-amaf-1k-v2 is significantly
stronger than genAnchor-1k, defeating it 9 out of 9 times. I still have
to wonder what the cause of the strength difference is.
On Sat, 2007-09-29 at 08:52 -0400, Don Dailey wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Excellent, I am glad you found the issue. I had a strong sense it
> would be something like this.
>
> This is a fairly common type of bug in software and is why I suggested
> it, however I think it's the first time I've ever directed someone to
> the specific line of code without having ever seen the code! (Of
> course it was a wild stab in the dark.)
>
> - - Don
>
>
> Jason House wrote:
> > On Fri, 2007-09-28 at 18:43 -0400, Don Dailey wrote:
> >> Somewhere in your program I am sure there is a head-slapping error you
> >> will find and when you do you will scream out loud! Don't give up.
> >
> > Yup... A nice little omission of casting.
> >
> > int nwins, nsims;
> > ...
> > double winRate = nwins/nsims;
> > ...
> > write("Picking move {} with win rate of", move, nwins*1.0/nsims);
> >
> >
> > What kept me from seeing this immediately (AKA bot plays
> > A1,A2,A3...A9,B1,B2...B9,C1...C9,...) is that there's logic that looks
> > at two moves with the same winning rate and picks the one with the
> > higher number of simulations. That can really help in non-AMAF
> > implementations where the number of sims are low.
> >
> > It turns out that the code that I copied/pasted to make a quick AMAF bot
> > used floating point numbers for nwins and nsims... My so-called monte
> > carlo transposition reuse (MCTR) where they have to be floating point
> > values.
> >
> > I kicked off hb-amaf-1k-v2. While it lost its first game online, it's
> > play was WAY better than it has been. It's rating will certainly settle
> > much higher.
> >
> > I hope that was the issue and there are no more biggies like that! This
> > discussion was very helpful for me to dig up all kinds of small bugs in
> > other parts of my code. Once I confirm this is the big bug, I'll try
> > variants with the different handling to see how that affects the rating
> > (I'd call all past tests of variations worthless given the nature of
> > this bug)
> >
> > While this may give an 800 ELO boost to the AMAF bot, I'm disappointed
> > that it won't help my other versions like that. The other changes dug
> > up in this long discussion will likely give them some boost though.
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > computer-go mailing list
> > [email protected]
> > http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
> >
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
> Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
>
> iD8DBQFG/kqFDsOllbwnSikRAlNYAJ9R4yriIDN8UleHjlK/Ex7SqsjQVgCfaeL2
> 8MHiz56EXGa5GLZ4hDt/QFo=
> =1nFu
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> _______________________________________________
> computer-go mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
_______________________________________________
computer-go mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
