* Peter Carlson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [070822 15:23]: > I dont really have any precise data. It's more of a feeling. Obviously if > gnu thinks it is in a losing position it wont offer a > double. I guess what my main point was that once gnu offers, if you press > hint, the hint will > 75% of the time - based upon actual
One of the weird things a neural net like gnubg is that these bots offer nearly perfect doubles. If you are offered a double and the bot didn't roll a marketloser before you can almost always be sure it's a close take, otherwise a pass. > game playing - advise you to take the double. Then almost 100% of the time > I'll lose, following the hints for every play. For > example: > > gnu offers double > hint says take, so I take > gnu rolls and plays > I roll and press hint and I have *usually* less then 20% chance of winning. > I follow each hint for every roll and I end up losing. > So again the real question is would gnu offer a double if it didn't think it > was in a significantly better position to win. And if > it is in a better position to win, which I have to believe it is, why would > the hint offer to take? If you use hint all the time this is a good way to see how a certain position develops. This will help your understanding of the game. That was the good news. Now to the bad news: Better do a rollout and let the computer play both sides. If you really want meaningful numbers you need _at least_ 108 games (from the good old days where rollouts were performed on a real backgammon board), better 1296. So play a certain position 1296 times, record every result and then come back. Ciao Achim _______________________________________________ Bug-gnubg mailing list Bug-gnubg@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-gnubg