| |
BGonline.org Forums
XGR++
Posted By: Stick In Response To: XGR++ (Timothy Chow)
Date: Tuesday, 9 August 2011, at 12:39 a.m.
By the way, do you realize that it makes no sense for you to pooh-pooh truncated 3-ply rollouts, while at the same time being anxious to make sure your plays align with XGR++? XGR++ is nothing more than a truncated 3-ply rollout.
I don't 'pooh-pooh', I shit on 3 ply rollouts for severe backgame positions. As I've said before, other than eliminating plays that are clearly wrong but that people may still make because of how complicated the position is they're pretty worthless. I was not anxious to make sure my plays aligned w/XGR++'s ... what I meant with what I said is I expect XGR++'s answers to align with mine, not the other way around. I find the positions here easy enough that I would expect the bot to get them right. I'm defining my plays as right and hoping the bot is good enough to see that.
Similarly in the recent thread about containing two checkers, it makes no sense that you say that rollouts are worthless while at the same time being careful to make your own plays (when you're playing it out by hand) align with XGR+'s opinion, since XGR+'s opinion cannot be any better than that of a rollout.
I played out my play and Daniel's play. I also added the loose hit via Casper's request but never played it out, I simply don't like it and would never make that play. When playing it out I wasn't careful to make sure my own plays aligned, they aligned period. I thought it worth mentioning. I also said anything less than a 4 ply/XGR+ rollout for those kinds of positions I would pay no attention to. What I'd like for those positions before I even pay attention to the results is XGR+/XGR+ rollout w/a gigantic move filter and that's just what I provided.
Stick
| |
BGonline.org Forums is maintained by Stick with WebBBS 5.12.