|
From: | Mark Higgins |
Subject: | Re: [Bug-gnubg] "Joseph-ID" in benchmark db |
Date: | Sun, 12 Feb 2012 11:13:25 -0500 |
My best player (TD trained, race & contact networks, a couple extra inputs beyond the standard Tesauro ones) has an average error of 0.0164ppg/move in the contact set, so not surprisingly worse than GNUbg (I assume 1125 means 0.01125ppg/move?). I also was curious which benchmark set was most relevant for predicting match score, since of course a real game is a mixture of the positions. I took a bunch of my players, of varying skills, and calculated the average error rate for the three benchmark sets; and also played each against PubEval for 40k cubeless money games. Then I regressed the score in those games against the benchmark ERs to see which was most important (using R^2 as a proxy for importance). Turns out the contact benchmark is most relevant, followed by crashed. Race is not that important. Details here: On Feb 12, 2012, at 8:51 AM, Øystein Schønning-Johansen wrote: I've looped through all 'm'-positionsThe following way: |
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |