[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Bug-gnubg] Suspect bearoff results
From: |
Ian Shaw |
Subject: |
[Bug-gnubg] Suspect bearoff results |
Date: |
Fri, 13 Dec 2002 15:01:48 -0000 |
GNU Backgammon Position ID: qMduAwDYvmgDAA
Match ID : cAkrAAAAAAAA
+24-23-22-21-20-19------18-17-16-15-14-13-+ O: GnuBg
| O O O | | O O O O | 0 points
| O | | O O O O |
| O | | O |
| O | | |
| | | |
| |BAR| |v 1 point match (Cube: 1)
| X | | |
| X | | |
| X | | |
| X X X | | X X | Rolled 62
| X X X | | X X X X | 0 points
+-1--2--3--4--5--6-------7--8--9-10-11-12-+ X: Ian
Does it really make no difference what I play here? I guess it's possible since
the position is so flexible, but I'd like reassurance that the database is
working correctly.
Why is there a 2-ply or 0-ply evaluation when it is all being looked up in a
database? The ply should be meaningless. It would make more sense to report
BEAROFF-OS or something.
This also takes a lot longer to come up with a hint than if I use the race net
(temporarily renaming gnubg_os.bd and restart). Is this to be expected? Are the
results needlessly looked up multiple times for the different plies?
1. Cubeful 2-ply 11/5 7/5 Eq.: +0.642
0.821 0.000 0.000 - 0.179 0.000 0.000
2-ply cubeful 100% speed [world class]
2. Cubeful 2-ply 12/6 7/5 Eq.: +0.642 ( -0.000)
0.821 0.000 0.000 - 0.179 0.000 0.000
2-ply cubeful 100% speed [world class]
3. Cubeful 2-ply 12/10 11/5 Eq.: +0.642 ( -0.000)
0.821 0.000 0.000 - 0.179 0.000 0.000
2-ply cubeful 100% speed [world class]
4. Cubeful 2-ply 12/6 11/9 Eq.: +0.642 ( -0.000)
0.821 0.000 0.000 - 0.179 0.000 0.000
2-ply cubeful 100% speed [world class]
5. Cubeful 2-ply 11/9 11/5 Eq.: +0.642 ( -0.000)
0.821 0.000 0.000 - 0.179 0.000 0.000
2-ply cubeful 100% speed [world class]
6. Cubeful 0-ply 10/4 7/5 Eq.: +0.642 ( -0.000)
0.821 0.000 0.000 - 0.179 0.000 0.000
0-ply cubeful [expert]
7. Cubeful 0-ply 12/10 12/6 Eq.: +0.642 ( -0.000)
0.821 0.000 0.000 - 0.179 0.000 0.000
0-ply cubeful [expert]
8. Cubeful 0-ply 11/5 6/4 Eq.: +0.642 ( -0.000)
0.821 0.000 0.000 - 0.179 0.000 0.000
0-ply cubeful [expert]
9. Cubeful 0-ply 11/5 10/8 Eq.: +0.642 ( -0.000)
0.821 0.000 0.000 - 0.179 0.000 0.000
0-ply cubeful [expert]
10. Cubeful 0-ply 12/4 Eq.: +0.642 ( -0.000)
0.821 0.000 0.000 - 0.179 0.000 0.000
0-ply cubeful [expert]
11. Cubeful 0-ply 12/6 10/8 Eq.: +0.642 ( -0.000)
0.821 0.000 0.000 - 0.179 0.000 0.000
0-ply cubeful [expert]
12. Cubeful 0-ply 11/9 10/4 Eq.: +0.642 ( -0.000)
0.821 0.000 0.000 - 0.179 0.000 0.000
0-ply cubeful [expert]
13. Cubeful 0-ply 11/3 Eq.: +0.642 ( -0.000)
0.821 0.000 0.000 - 0.179 0.000 0.000
0-ply cubeful [expert]
14. Cubeful 0-ply 12/6 5/3 Eq.: +0.642 ( -0.001)
0.821 0.000 0.000 - 0.179 0.000 0.000
0-ply cubeful [expert]
* On disk 1-sided bearoff database evaluator:
- generated by GNU Backgammon
- up to 15 chequers on 12 points (17383860 positions) per player
- database includes gammon distributions
- number of reads: 523044
* In memory 1-sided bearoff database evaluator:
- generated by GNU Backgammon
- up to 15 chequers on 6 points (54264 positions) per player
- database includes gammon distributions
- number of reads: 124
Evaluator: BEAROFF-OS
- [Bug-gnubg] Suspect bearoff results,
Ian Shaw <=