Fw: [Bug-gnubg] patches for changing evaluation in mid-rollout

[Ned Cross]

Yes, It's a 1296 rollout.

 But the reported equities did not seem to be in line with the reported win
 %'s in the rollout status window.  The 61%w / 33%g / 0.3%bg distribution is
 very close to the 61.4%w / 32.6%g /  1.1%bg that I am seeing now after 938
 trials.

I would expect a similar win % distribution to yield a similar cubeless
 equity, so that was the reason for my initial report.

 I suppose "partial" results are meaningless for "rotate rolls" rollouts, so
it really doesn't matter.  I'll experiment some more and see if I come
 across anything notable.

 Ned

> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jim Segrave" <address@hidden>
> To: "Ned Cross" <address@hidden>
> Cc: "Øystein O Johansen" <address@hidden>; <address@hidden>;
> <address@hidden>
> Sent: Wednesday, October 30, 2002 2:39 PM
> Subject: Re: [Bug-gnubg] patches for changing evaluation in mid-rollout
>
>
> > On Wed 30 Oct 2002 (01:22 -0800), Ned Cross wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > >     The user interface looks great at first glance.
> > >
> > > I just set up a 2-ply, 2-step rollout of yesterday's GOL cube
decision,
> and
> > > the equities for "player xyz owns 2-cube" appear to be doubled.
> > >
> > > After 36 trials, GNU is giving a cubeless equity of ~ +2.500 for
> double/take
> > > (61% wins, 33% gammon wins, 0.3% bg wins, 12% gammon losses, 4% bg
> losses)
> > > when my 0-ply rollout gave +1.290, and 2-ply eval gave +1.499 (similar
> > > win/loss/gammon breakdown).
> >
> > I saw your followup where the same rollout was settling to a
> > reasonable figure. I don't think my changes will have broken anything,
> > but I hope people will try it for a while to see what they think.
> >
> > As to why this might have started off so odd...
> >
> > Are you doing a 1296 trial rollout? If so, then the first 36 trials
> > will be for a roll of 1-1, which for Kit would have been a nice roll,
> > he could close his 5 point and put a 2nd chequer on the bar, leaving
> > the readers with two to bring in against a 4 point board. So the
> > equities on 1-1 would be pretty high I would think. By the time you
> > get to 770 rolls, you're looking at 4-5 or similar and some of the not
> > so good rolls with good followups from the reader's side will have
> > brought things back down.
> >
> > If you aren't doing a 1296 trial, then I don't know.
> > The behaviour with rotate rolls and 1296 games is the point of some of
> > the discussions about randomising the order of doing the trials in a
> > rollout. If we randomise, then stopping a long rollout (or simply
> > doing what you did and noting the numbers while it progressed) are
> > less likely to produce such huge swings in apparent equity.
> >
> > --
> > Jim Segrave           address@hidden
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Bug-gnubg mailing list
> > address@hidden
> > http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-gnubg
>