On 13/06/2013 01:16, Jason House wrote:
The algorithm I put was based on the first link which did not have an
open face variant.
My interpretation was as follows:
After splitting your 13 cards into 3 hands, the top hands are compared
to each other. The best top hand gets a point and the lowest loses a
point. The same goes for the middle and bottom hands. That yields a
score between -3 and +3.
If you dump everything into one best hand, you're easily defeated by
opponents who try to keep their hands at comparable strength... You
would earn one point for your best hand and lose one point from each of
the other two hands (net result = -1 point). There is some kind of
balancing that must be done to get the best score.
You might even achieve the best back hand and still lose 3-0, if you end
up "fouled" with your front hand beating your middle hand.
Nick
Sent from my iPhone
On Jun 12, 2013, at 6:08 PM, Don Dailey <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
I don't quite see the point. The goal is to find the best possible
hand YOU can make with your 13 cards and there is no betting, so I
see no point in using Monte Carlo here.
What am I missing?
Is it whether to sacrifice one of the 3 hands to strengthen the other
2? Or in the case of a really bad hand to at least make 1 really
strong hand?
Don
On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 6:03 PM, Jason House
<[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
For a particular breakdown into 3 hands, it should be possible to
do a monte carlo simulation by randomly distribute the remaining
cards to the other players and then randomly separating each
player's cards into 3 hands. A node in the search tree would be
scored as the average result of many simulations.
I can think of a few ways to build a search tree. If you have
experience in the game and know a few general strategies, they
will likely be very handy for achieving enough strength to
evaluate the approach. The search tree should be able to give
feedback on which strategy is best. The same strategies may also
help improve the random opponents, but that might require more
care. It's easy to introduce bias.
Sent from my iPhone
On Jun 12, 2013, at 4:06 PM, Oleg Barmin <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Sure. It's open chinese poker:
http://www.pokerlistings.com/poker-rules-chinese-poker
Среда, 12 июня 2013, 20:57 +01:00 от Nick Wedd
<[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>:
On 12/06/2013 20:33, Oleg Barmin wrote:
> > For quality assessment, play many games against one or
more reference
> opponents.
> It's difficult to assament algorithm with a game against
humans. The
> game is young and there are no recognized masters at the
moment. So it's
> very hard to find human-opponent with a really good game
skills.
>
> > With card games you can get some serious intransitivity,
rocks,
> paper, scissors type of stuff.
> The aim of this game is to max your scores. Each turn you
need to select
> one of three choices. Each choice has an expectation value
of your
> scores. Optimal strategy here is to select a choice with
max expectation
> value. But it will take a years to calculate an expectation
value at the
> start of the game. So the game has no such intransitivity
as rocks,
> paper, scissors.
> At the last turns we can make a complete choice enumeration and
> calculate an exact scores expectation value ( does go
algorithms use the
> same technique? ) . It's not the way for the first half of
the game. But
> the first half is more important.
Can you give a link to the rules of this game? Or even just
tell us its
name?
Nick
>
> Oleg
>
>
> Среда, 12 июня 2013, 14:24 -04:00 от Don Dailey
<[email protected]
<https://e.mail.ru/sentmsg?compose&[email protected]>>:
>
>
>
> On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 11:30 AM, David Fotland
> <[email protected]
<https://e.mail.ru/sentmsg?compose&To=fotland@smart%2dgames.com>
> <sentmsg?mailto=mailto%3afotland@smart%2dgames.com
<http://2dgames.com>>> wrote:
>
> For quality assessment, play many games against one or more
> reference opponents.
>
>
> Especially for a game that is not a game of perfect
information such
> as go or chess. With card games you can get some serious
> intransitivity, rocks, paper, scissors type of stuff.
>
> Don
>
>
> ____
>
> __ __
>
> David____
>
> __ __
>
> *From:*[email protected]
<https://e.mail.ru/sentmsg?compose&To=%2acomputer%2dgo%[email protected]>
>
<sentmsg?mailto=mailto%3acomputer%2dgo%[email protected]
<https://e.mail.ru/sentmsg?compose&To=sentmsg%3fmailto%3dmailto%253acomputer%252dgo%[email protected]>>
> [mailto:[email protected]
<https://e.mail.ru/sentmsg?compose&To=computer%2dgo%[email protected]>
>
<sentmsg?mailto=mailto%3acomputer%2dgo%[email protected]
<https://e.mail.ru/sentmsg?compose&To=sentmsg%3fmailto%3dmailto%253acomputer%252dgo%[email protected]>>]
> *On Behalf Of *Oleg Barmin
> *Sent:* Wednesday, June 12, 2013 8:02 AM
> *To:* [email protected]
<https://e.mail.ru/sentmsg?compose&To=computer%[email protected]>
> <sentmsg?mailto=mailto%3acomputer%[email protected]
<https://e.mail.ru/sentmsg?compose&To=sentmsg%3fmailto%3dmailto%253acomputer%[email protected]>>
> *Subject:* [Computer-go] algorithm quality assessment____
>
> __ __
>
> Hi, everybody,____
>
> I am working at the development of a cards game algorithm using
> MCTS. Technically, the game model is expect minmax tree search,
> where direct search takes up too much time, that is why I
> decided to use MCTS.____
>
> The issue of using MCST, like any other approximation algorithm
> is its quality assessment. I am developing an algorithm for a
> game where no recognized masters exist. How do you think, guys,
> if for instance Go (or Amazons) provided no way to assess an
> algorithm playing with professional gamers (or other programs),
> how would you assets its quality?____
>
> My second question: I have not yet learned Go in and out,
> however in my opinion, any search of a next step should
identify
> a number of options with similar or even the same assessment.
> How do you resolve this issue?____
>
>
> Best regards,
> Oleg Barmin.____
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Computer-go mailing list
> [email protected]
<https://e.mail.ru/sentmsg?compose&To=computer%[email protected]>
> <sentmsg?mailto=mailto%3acomputer%[email protected]
<https://e.mail.ru/sentmsg?compose&To=sentmsg%3fmailto%3dmailto%253acomputer%[email protected]>>
> http://dvandva.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/computer-go
>
>
>
>
> Best regards,
> Oleg Barmin.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Computer-go mailing list
> [email protected]
<https://e.mail.ru/sentmsg?compose&To=computer%[email protected]>
> http://dvandva.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/computer-go
>
--
Nick Wedd
[email protected]
<https://e.mail.ru/sentmsg?compose&[email protected]>
_______________________________________________
Computer-go mailing list
[email protected]
<https://e.mail.ru/sentmsg?compose&To=computer%[email protected]>
http://dvandva.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/computer-go
Best regards,
Oleg Barmin.
_______________________________________________
Computer-go mailing list
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
http://dvandva.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/computer-go
_______________________________________________
Computer-go mailing list
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
http://dvandva.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/computer-go
_______________________________________________
Computer-go mailing list
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
http://dvandva.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/computer-go
_______________________________________________
Computer-go mailing list
[email protected]
http://dvandva.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/computer-go
--
Nick Wedd
[email protected]
_______________________________________________
Computer-go mailing list
[email protected]
http://dvandva.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/computer-go
