MK, I'm absolutely not a spokesperson for the group. I'm merely an enthusiastic
user who tries to take some the load off the devs by answering those questions
that I'm able to. If they are not commenting, it's for their own reasons and
that shouldn't be interpreted as a tacit endorsement of my
MK: I didn't say the selection was random. The self-play moves were random.
These two statements appear contradictory to me. What do you mean by
"selection" if not the "self-play moves"? Please clarify your understanding of
which parts of the training are random.
My understanding is this:
0)
MK: I don't understand why YOU wouldn't double at 99%? Can you
explain this?
If the oppenent will still take at 100% then why risk losing 2 points 1% of the
time?
I thought I answered your question about win rates previously.
A bot that always doubles, I'd expect to lose 0.3 ppg. It's hard to
MK: What I PROPOSE is doing the same thing done training TD-Gammon v.1, I.E.
random self-play, but this time also cubeful and MATCHFUL, i.e. random cube as
well as checker decisions.
As I remember it (though it's many years since I read the research), the
self-play wasn't accomplished by
Hi Max,
GnuBg can import match files and analyse them.
You can also copy an XG position id and paste it into gnubg.
Like XG, it can identify errors and estimate how lucky the rolls are. The
results won't be exactly the same as XG because the analysis engine is
different. But it will be very
Of course I don't assume that gnubg always wins. That would be naive.
A cube strategy against a bot that never passes: only double when (a) you are
100% to win (b) it's the last roll of the game and you have an advantage. The
bot can also take a double deeper than normal, since the mutant will
Yes, I am referring to theoretical continuous model for the 20% value, and
agree it would apply to any suitable game, not just backgammon.
But backgammon isn't a continuous game. It has jumps in equity betewen one
opportunity to double and the next.
The concept of cube efficiency is the
If the mutant strategy is always to take, then gnubg GAINS when Mutant takes a
D/P because that increases the points GnuBg wins.
Currently, gnubg is assuming it is playing against a player using it's own cube
strategy. It could be reprogrammed to take advantage of knowing that it's
opponent
I'm glad we agree on the basic 25% take point. Do you also agree on the the
theoretical 20% take point for perfect cube efficiency?
As far as I know, the only part of cube theory not calculated mathematically is
the estimate made for cube efficiency. But it's a long time since I read
Janowski
MK: Even though I think most of you won't absorb what I wrote above, because
you all "divinely believe" in the current "cube skill theory", I won't consider
it a total waste of my time even if it sows a seed of doubt in just one mind.
I don’t "divinely believe" in the current cube theory. I
MK: This is why I am doing my various experiments. One of which that I had
previously mentioned in this very thread involves a "mutant cube strategy" of
doubling at GWC > 50% and taking at GWC > 0%. In that experiment of 20,000
money games, the mutant won 40.80% of total points against GnuBG
MK "Those numbers are based on how the bot would play against itself. If you
accept the bot's decisions as best/perfect and if you try to play just like
bot, assuming that your opponent will also try to play just like the bot, of
course you wouldn't/shouldn't double."
Agreed. Against a worse
MK,
You wrote "Not the "equity" but the "equity difference" between the "from"
position and the "to" position."
I can't see any difference in outcome between selecting the play that maximises
the equity of the move made, and maximising the equity gain between the current
position and the new
Sorry, MK, I didn't read back over the old threads, to see what links you had
referenced, before I replied. It was late at night, and I was using my phone
rather than a PC.
In that case, I must have misunderstood what you meant by, "Is making the bot
auto-play the same as doing rollouts?" It
and these. Hopefully others will pitch in their
comments in response...
MK
> *From:*bug-gnubg-bounces+ian.shaw=riverauto.co...@gnu.org
> *On Behalf Of *Ian Shaw
> via Bug reports for and
> general discussion about GNU Backgammon.
> *Sent:* Thursday, February 8, 2024 11:39 A
=riverauto.co...@gnu.org
On Behalf Of Ian Shaw via
Bug reports for and general discussion about GNU Backgammon.
Sent: Thursday, February 8, 2024 11:39 AM
To: playbg-...@yahoo.com; bug-gnubg@gnu.org
Cc: Philippe Michel
Subject: RE: Interesting question/experiment about value of cube ownership
Does it make sense to do a cubeless rollout of a cube position? I see that if I
ask for one, gnubg automatically ticks the Cubeful Rollout box and does a
cubeful rollout.
But if the bot doesn't understand the position, it may erroneously pass future
cubes and give a bad result. For example, 9
On the GUI cube decision window, the win breakdown has the player on roll
wining 58.3% (36.8% gammons).
Yet when I use the Copy to get the text window, the results are the opposite
way round.
I get the same result when starting a match from the beginning or pasting in an
XG id.
Chequer play
-bounces+ian.shaw=riverauto.co...@gnu.org
On Behalf Of Ian Shaw via
Bug reports for and general discussion about GNU Backgammon.
Sent: Thursday, February 22, 2024 9:04 AM
To: Philippe Michel
Cc: bug-gnubg@gnu.org
Subject: RE: Suggestion for improvement of Temperature Map for Cube decisions.
I get
I get the same issue in a $ game.
0HPhATDgc/ABMA:MAFgAAAE
Cube analysis
2-ply cubeless equity +0.024 (Money: +0.021)
0.506 0.147 0.010 - 0.494 0.140 0.008
Cubeful equities:
1. No double +0.028
2. Double, pass+1.000 (+0.972)
3. Double, take-0.265 (-0.293)
Proper
Hi all,
In the Facebook group Backgammon News, Wayne Joseph raised some questions about
the values displayed in the Temperature map. I've posted extracts from the
discussion below for context, but the gist of it is.
The user was confused by the equities in the Temperature map being normalised
Yesterday I posted about the Temperature Map, but it doesn't seem to have
appeared on the mailing list.
Is this because the message for formatted as html and included screen shots and
text highlighting?
Should I only post plain text?
* Ian
The menu item for Display bug in Analyse, Clear Analysis, Move displays:
"noun|Move"
Instead of just "Move"
This appears in en_US.po, which I assume is the cause.
#: gtkgame.c:4028 gtkgame.c:4039 gtkmovelist.c:63 gtkrolls.c:198 html.c:2161
I installed the latest version, and all my settings appear intact. At least,
the board colours and number of threads are as I remember them.
I've tried on 2 PCs and both are OK.
I still have the problem on my desktop where I have to move a dialog window a
few mm before I can click a second
It just so happens that I rolled out the opening position a few days ago for
another reason. This was at 7-away 7-away rather than $ play, because I was
interested in match play. I doubt that makes a huge difference.
This was using gnubg-1_08_dev-20240103-setup.exe not the newest
Hi Murat,
Good luck with your project.
No, I'm not one of the developers. I can just about read C if I stare at it
long enough. But I've never devoted time to learn it properly.
I've just been on the mailing list a long time, contributed bug reports and
rollout time, and answered questions
Hi MK,
I know nothing of Python, so I can’t help you with that. Good luck.
-- Ian
-Original Message-
From: MK
Sent: Friday, January 19, 2024 12:20 AM
To: Ian Shaw ; bug-gnubg@gnu.org
Subject: Re: Problems with auto-roll and auto-play functions
On 1/18/2024 2:22 PM, MK wrote:
> On
The file file.c has a function GetFilename which includes the line
if (mi.nYear)
sz = g_strdup_printf("%s-%s_%dp_%04u-%02u-%02u.sgf", ap[0].szName,
ap[1].szName, ms. nMatchTo, mi.nYear, mi.nMonth, mi.nDay);
I couldn’t find where mi is set, but if it includes the parameters
Hi Murat,
The code doesn’t "make an exception for the bot". The bot already ALWAYS
automatically decides whether to roll or move. The exceptions are for the
human, to speed up our play when the decision is trivial. The human is allowed
to roll, EXCEPT if the auto roll is checked and he
Hi Murat,
I would expect the auto-roll and auto-play functions to only apply to the human
player. The bot makes it's own decisions on whether to roll or move.
If you have a script that makes moves, perhaps you could approach it in another
way.
Set the player to human.
Get a hint.
I thought we used to be able to paste a position ID without it resetting the
match score, so we could play it repeatedly.
This came up quite independently for me today when I wanted to practice
64S-55K-F-DT.
4HPhQUAzTvABMA:QQkE is the position and match ID.
It works splendidly when I
Hello!
I want request a new rule ( "no-home-hit-and-run" ) for gnubg if possible.
The Player may not make additional moves with a checker that has hit an
opponent’s checker in the Player’s home board.
There are two exceptions to this rule.
Player doesn’t have any other legal moves.
Player hits
Yes!
Øystein’s logic reminds me of an anecdote from years ago. A friend took a
double in a non-skill position that was a clear drop. The dice bailed him out,
but he redoubled way too early. He explained, “you’re the better player so I
have to do things with the cube.” I explained that the
I have a copy of the book. There are more than 60 tables in it, but if
anyone knows which one(s) youre looking for, Im happy to send along
photos.
Best,
David Levy
From: Bug-gnubg On
Behalf Of Ian Shaw
Sent: Monday, August 22, 2022 1:34 PM
To: Øystein Schønning-Johansen ; Ezequiel
34 matches
Mail list logo
