>From: <[email protected]> >To: <[email protected]> >Sent: Friday, November 07, 2008 4:39 PM >Subject: [quackle] Digest Number 525
> 3a. Re: Estimating vocabulary advantage... > Posted by: "Kevin Leeds" [EMAIL PROTECTED] vekkus4 > Date: Thu Nov 6, 2008 6:16 pm ((PST)) > > Human errors might be classified somehow, and Quackle could be programmed > to try to mimic them. Possible categories: > Don't know a word at all > Know a word, but only x % of the time (x is between 0 and 100). > (This would take a lot of research to develop) > Not very good at using hot spots yet > Too afraid of setting up bingo hooks > Too afraid of setting up hot spots on triples (both red & blue) > Too fond of using 3 letter words like COW > Noplays the opponent when more than 3 bingos are made > Fails to notice the number of tiles in the bag > > I think the list is both incomplete, yet too long now. I don't think it is too long. To simulate a user who doesn't know the whole lexicon, make Quackle play only words from a smaller lexicon. There are such word lists on the web, e.g. here: http://wordlist.sourceforge.net/ http://aspell.net/ Such word lists could of course be enhanced by the addition of words which a novice would most likely learn first, e.g. the 2s, 3s and some of the likeliest 7s. For every thing that Quackle puts a value on, could Quackle be made to mimic a human player who has the weakness of either overestimating or underestimating it? For example: Underestimates the importance of good leave Overestimates the importance of good leave (bonus-chaser who would rather play off one tile for a low score than make a play which gets a good score and still has a fairly good leave) or, more generally, "uses an inferior evaluation of leave". We could, for example, have a user who: Underestimates a blank, an S or the Z Overestimates the Q Assesses leave merely on vowel/consonant balance
