* Joseph Heled <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [070704 09:59]:
> On 7/4/07, Achim Mueller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >Didn't you also make a _very_ long simulation comparing mets?
>
> Yes, but I played each set of dice rolls twice, identical rolls but
> swapped. This handles the variance better, and I could not find a
> large difference if I recall correctly.
I made a printout of doubling windows for the different equity tables.
Just a few examples:
Snowie Zadeh
n3 - n2 (1) 57,7 - 73,0 55,3 - 71,7
n3 - n4 (1) 37,8 - 62,5 41,5 - 65,9 !!
n4 - n2 (1) 65,8 - 81,2 63,3 - 79,4 !!
n4 - n4 (1) 50,0 - 72,0 50,0 - 70,9
n4 - n4 (2) 50,0 - 66,4 50,0 - 67,7
The results of gnubg matches against itself with different mets must
somehow reflect these differences.
I'll check whether I can do a longer simulation of gnubg(g11) -
gnubg(zadeh) here at work. Do you still have the framework of your
rollouts?
Ciao
Achim
_______________________________________________
Bug-gnubg mailing list
Bug-gnubg@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-gnubg
