[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: current development

From: Timothy Y. Chow
Subject: Re: current development
Date: Sat, 7 Dec 2019 15:32:59 -0500 (EST)
User-agent: Alpine 2.21 (LRH 202 2017-01-01)

On Sun, 8 Dec 2019, Joseph Heled wrote:
Yes. But there is the question of how easy it is to "navigate" to those positions. can you reliably get to those positions against a bot and win from their ignorance?I have my doubts.

I've done some experimentation of this sort, but rather than quote my own experience, I'll point you to reports by people who have spent more time on this than I have. BGOnline is having some server problems, but I think these links should work:


The upshot is that GNU 2-ply (version 0.xx) or XG 3-ply (version 1) is reportedly exploitable in this manner, if you play money games with an unlimited cube. Stronger settings are reportedly harder to exploit, but maybe not impossible.

In any case, as I said earlier, in my opinion this line of investigation is not really the most interesting one. IMO the closeness of a bot to perfection should be measured not just by its performance from the standard starting position, but from *any* position that could legally arise in a game. The reason is that in practice, bots are used to analyze positions that arise in actual games. It's obviously a logical error to conclude that the bot's analysis of an arbitrary position is sound just because it plays well from the starting position, but I'm surprised to see how often I see people implicitly making this error.


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]