[ View Thread ] [ Post Response ] [ Return to Index ] [ Read Prev Msg ] [ Read Next Msg ]

BGonline.org Forums

Backgame questions and positions

Posted By: Timothy Chow
Date: Thursday, 24 September 2015, at 3:55 p.m.

In Response To: Backgame questions and positions (Stick)

Also crank it up for "wild" containment positions with lots of checkers trying to contain one checker. I strongly suspect that part of the problem that XG has with backgames is that it has trouble with the post-hit containment play. So for backgames with 4 or 5 checkers back, I don't expect that upping the rollout settings will change much. However, your positions are in the realm of 7 or more checkers back so it could start making a difference.

One type of decision that I don't think is well understood by bots or humans is when the backgamer should switch into "kamikaze mode." For example in your Position 3, imagine that it were White's turn instead and her roll were 62. Would 21/15* 4/2 be the right idea? Strong humans and XG all believe that kamikaze play is sometimes the right idea. The question is when. For a computer to evaluate the equities reliably, though, it has to reliably evaluate the equities of superbackgames with 10+ checkers back. That task, in turn, depends on knowing how to contain a checker by rolling a prime all the way around the board. But rolling a prime all the way around the board is precisely the type of position that bots don't understand at all. For this reason, I suspect that XG typically switches into kamikaze mode somewhat too late. If this is true then this systematic error can bias the evaluations of other positions, of course.

Messages In This Thread

 

Post Response

Your Name:
Your E-Mail Address:
Subject:
Message:

If necessary, enter your password below:

Password:

 

 

[ View Thread ] [ Post Response ] [ Return to Index ] [ Read Prev Msg ] [ Read Next Msg ]

BGonline.org Forums is maintained by Stick with WebBBS 5.12.