On Sun, 8 Jan 2017, isambard mews wrote:
I tried to recreate the bearoff database and noticed some differences which could be due to rounding, but already at position #47 there were some significant differences. My workings for position 47 are given below. Have I made a mistake in the calculation methodology?
Th discrepancy for position #47 is not a rounding error. The difference is 11/1296 more bearoffs in 2 rolls instead of 3 for gnubg.
Interestingly, the average number of rolls to bear off is 2.21382 for you and 2.20528 for gnubg but the race4 software there : http://www.bkgm.com/rgb/rgb.cgi?view+788 that works recursively and plays perfectly claims that the average is 2.117155, so it looks like gnubg misplays a dice in one situation and you do in two.
_______________________________________________ Bug-gnubg mailing list Bug-gnubg@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-gnubg
