BGonline.org Forums

Can the bot possibly be right?

Posted By: Havard Raddum
Date: Thursday, 20 September 2007, at 3:07 a.m.

In Response To: Can the bot possibly be right? (Frankie D)

One or two of the games I have played recently have turned into backgames resembling this one for my opponent, and I too have been given significant errors by GNU 2-ply for not breaking home board point and hitting two. I see that a rollout does not change GNU's mind. Has anyone seen a comparison between the evaluation of GNU and Snowie for backgames? And is it vastly accepted that Snowie is better at backgames? I know that GNU uses a separate neural net to evaluate backgames than it does to evaluate more common-looking positions. Could it be that this neural net has not been trained well enough? An interesting experiment would be to do rollouts where GNU plays the backgame and Snowie/BGblitz plays the other side and see how much GNU loses. Then do the same rollouts, but now with Snowie/BGblitz playing the backgame and GNU making the wacko plays. Which bot would do better?

Messages In This Thread

• Can the bot possibly be right?
  Frankie D -- Wednesday, 19 September 2007, at 6:12 p.m.
  • I did not mean to post the rollout
    Frankie D -- Wednesday, 19 September 2007, at 6:15 p.m.
    • I did not mean to post the rollout
      Keene -- Wednesday, 19 September 2007, at 6:21 p.m.
      • Snowie better at backgames?
        Frankie D -- Wednesday, 19 September 2007, at 6:25 p.m.
        • Snowie better at backgames?
          neilkaz -- Wednesday, 19 September 2007, at 7:05 p.m.
          • Snowie better at backgames?
            Frank Berger -- Wednesday, 19 September 2007, at 9:58 p.m.
  • Can the bot possibly be right?
    Matt Reklaitis -- Wednesday, 19 September 2007, at 7:38 p.m.
  • LOL
    Matt Cohn-Geier -- Wednesday, 19 September 2007, at 10:46 p.m.
    • Don't laugh
      neilkaz -- Thursday, 20 September 2007, at 4:17 a.m.
      • Don't laugh
        Matt Cohn-Geier -- Thursday, 20 September 2007, at 6:56 a.m.
        • Don't laugh
          neilkaz -- Thursday, 20 September 2007, at 11:10 p.m.
          • Don't laugh
            Hardy Hübener -- Sunday, 23 September 2007, at 10:13 p.m.
  • Can the bot possibly be right?
    Havard Raddum -- Thursday, 20 September 2007, at 3:07 a.m.
    • Can the bot possibly be right?
      Stick -- Thursday, 20 September 2007, at 3:52 a.m.
      • Can the bot possibly be right?
        Havard Raddum -- Friday, 21 September 2007, at 2:43 a.m.
    • Can the bot possibly be right?
      Ian Shaw -- Friday, 21 September 2007, at 11:55 a.m.
  • Can the bot possibly be right?
    Stick -- Thursday, 20 September 2007, at 5:14 a.m.
  • Can the bot possibly be right?
    happyjuggler0 -- Friday, 21 September 2007, at 2:30 a.m.
  • JellyFish 3.0 Says...
    mamabear -- Friday, 21 September 2007, at 3:09 a.m.
  • how else do you ---
    garyo -- Friday, 21 September 2007, at 2:37 p.m.
  • Who would play 6/2*/1*?
    Stanley E. Richards -- Friday, 21 September 2007, at 5:08 p.m.
    • Who would play 6/2*/1*?
      lucky player -- Friday, 21 September 2007, at 6:52 p.m.
      • Who would play 6/2*/1*?
        Stanley E. Richards -- Sunday, 23 September 2007, at 2:08 a.m.
    • Who would play 6/2*/1*?
      Keene -- Friday, 21 September 2007, at 7:22 p.m.
    • Who would play 6/2*/1*?
      Chuck Bower -- Friday, 21 September 2007, at 8:18 p.m.