Re: [Bug-gnubg] luck analysis suggestion

[O.M. Riordan]

> Should be fixed now.
> 
> I've added a new set of commands: "set analysis luckanalysis ..." that
> can be used to specify the evaluation parameters for the luck analysis.
> 
> For example,
> 
> set analysis luckanalysis plies 2
> set analysis luckanalisys cubeful on
> 
> The default settings is cubeful 0-ply.
> 
> Jørn
> 

Thanks; but one thing is not quite right. Also there are some bugs that I
hadn't noticed earlier.

what is not quite right is that the move selection should be at the same
ply as the analysis of the resulting position. Presumably they could be
done together - at $n$-ply a sensible sequence is, for each roll, do
something like: `decide on a move in the same way as if I was going to
play at $n$-ply, then return equity of that move at $n$-ply'. (The equity
would normally have been calculated while deciding the move, unless one
move was obviously best. Here $n$-ply equity is needed even if there is
only one legal move, or no legal moves.)

Bugs: 

(a) the results for the first move (of a match/game within a match) are
nonsense
e.g., -24% for opening 32 for second player

(b) the numbers don't add up right in MWC, being generally off by a factor
of 2:
e.g., in the attached file, move 11 (JF rolls 26), MWC for jellyfish
before roll 32.6% (from 1-ply of previous move), after roll 63.5% (0-ply
of current move), but 0-ply luck estimate only 15.45% (should be 30.9%).

(I'm guessing, but is it perhaps the case that in a match the
 -ar[OUTPUT(_CUBEFUL)_EQUITY] should be 1- ? This doesn't explain the
second though.)

At the same time I've noticed another unrelated bug; I'll send a separate
E-mail about this.

Oliver