Re: [Bug-gnubg] Even, odd and half plies (WAS: New Contact Net Error Rates)

[Nis]

--On Thursday, February 27, 2003 10:51 -0800 David Montgomery 
<address@hidden> wrote:

> My understanding of the current implementation is that
> we sample (striated, as much as possible) from the leaf
> nodes.  So a 100% 1-ply evaluation averages over 36
> (computationally optimized to 21, but let's use the 36
> basis) best next plays; a 33% 1-ply evaluation averages
> over 12 best next plays.

Correct.

> My understanding of what you are suggesting is that we
> do this, and combine it in a weighted average with the
> 0-ply evaluation.
>
> Is this right?

It doesn't catch all my ideas, at least. My first thought was to do 
something like what you suggest - evaluating some of the rolls at 1-ply, 
some at 0-ply. Then I realized that "evaluating a roll on 0-ply" does not 
make sense. I found two ways to repair this:

1) Average between 12 rolls at 1-ply and 24 times the static 0-ply eval.
2) Average between 12 rolls at 2-ply and 24 at 1-ply.

The second one can only be used for reduced evaluation of
2-ply and higher - but it should give superior results compared to any of 
the other "reduced evaluation" techniques, at no extra cost.

Perhaps we can implement both - using 1) for reduced 1-ply, and 2) for 
higher plies.

But to know whether this makes sense, we need benchmark results including 
the 2-ply evaluations ...

--
Nis Jorgensen
Amsterdam