Not using a new login after significant changes leads to some issue?
with both rating schrmes. It helps you and everyone else.
Pebbles learns from every game it plays. So I can't agree; drift is
inherent.
Do you mind sharing what pebbles does? UCT+RAVE? Any other enhancements?
It is UCT+RAVE,
On Tue, 21 Apr 2009, sheppar...@aol.com wrote:
Pebbles learns from every game it plays. So I can't agree; drift is
inherent.
But since you had bugs in the earlier version, how do you know,
without restarting it after bug-fixes how much of the drift
is from the learning part and how much from
On Tue, 21 Apr 2009, Jason House wrote:
AMAF and RAVE are the same thing. The MoGo team pioneered use of AMAF but
called it RAVE because of their paper's target audience.
I always thought them to be the application of the same heuristic at
a different time.
AMAF is usually applied at the end
At the moment, Pebbles is creating a huge drift. Brian - CGOS requires us to
use
new names on the server each time we change our bots. It computes the strength
using all games (heavilly biased with the results of the first 100 games)?
This is basically my first working version. Its rating
On Apr 20, 2009, at 6:11 PM, sheppar...@aol.com wrote:
At the moment, Pebbles is creating a huge drift. Brian - CGOS
requires us to use
new names on the server each time we change our bots. It computes
the strength
using all games (heavilly biased with the results of the first 100
games)
I recall reading about an Elo system that had better adaptation to players
whose
rating changes. It was called Glicko-2. Here is a link:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glicko_rating_system
This would be a very poor rating system for CGOS. He basically recommends
giving much higher K factors
