BGonline.org Forums

BOT development and backgame evals

Posted By: neilkaz
Date: Wednesday, 1 July 2009, at 4:44 p.m.

In Response To: About the only thing wrong with BGB is VERY pessimistic backgame evaluations. (Ian Dunstan)

It has been a very difficult task for BOT developers to have decent evaluation of backgames. Almost all BOTs in their early developmental stages end up being too race oriented and think that backgames are lots worse than they really are.

JF had this problem, although it was improved quite a bit with JF 3.0.

Early Snowie's had this problem, and much of the effort to improve Snowie 3 into the superior Snowie 4 was directed to improve backgame eval and play.

Early GNU's also had that problem. This was addressed when the engine was last trained (as a recall several years ago). I know that a well timed 31 backgame was used to help train and test GNU in backgames since I gave the GNU team that position.

I've seen early models of XBG for years and it used to be as pessimistic as BGB is when it comes to backgames. I gave Xavier a couple positions to train from or as guidelines. It will take a lot of testing and checking to tell whether XBG is a least close to as good as Snowie or GNU in basic backgames.

As far as XBG being based on the same NN as GNU, that is news to me and I honestly had no idea.

.. neilkaz ..

Messages In This Thread

• Test your favorite bot's evaluation skills on this 32 backgame
  neilkaz -- Tuesday, 30 June 2009, at 3:37 a.m.
  • Here's the position
    neilkaz -- Tuesday, 30 June 2009, at 3:38 a.m.
    • Here's the position
      Rich Munitz -- Tuesday, 30 June 2009, at 2:47 p.m.
    • Here's some evals
      neilkaz -- Tuesday, 30 June 2009, at 2:47 p.m.
      • Here's some evals
        Rich Munitz -- Tuesday, 30 June 2009, at 3:32 p.m.
        • Here's some evals
          neilkaz -- Tuesday, 30 June 2009, at 3:41 p.m.
    • Here's the position
      jdg -- Tuesday, 30 June 2009, at 4:09 p.m.
    • Here's the position
      Chuck Bower -- Tuesday, 30 June 2009, at 4:16 p.m.
      • Here's the position
        Marty Storer -- Wednesday, 1 July 2009, at 3:01 p.m.
        • Here's the position
          Chuck Bower -- Wednesday, 1 July 2009, at 3:56 p.m.
    • Here's the position
      Frank Berger -- Tuesday, 30 June 2009, at 7:21 p.m.
      • About the only thing wrong with BGB is VERY pessimistic backgame evaluations.
        neilkaz -- Wednesday, 1 July 2009, at 2:47 a.m.
        • About the only thing wrong with BGB is VERY pessimistic backgame evaluations.
          Ian Dunstan -- Wednesday, 1 July 2009, at 5:51 a.m.
          • BOT development and backgame evals
            neilkaz -- Wednesday, 1 July 2009, at 4:44 p.m.
            • BOT development and backgame evals
              Frank Berger -- Wednesday, 1 July 2009, at 9:03 p.m.
            • BOT development and backgame evals
              eXtreme Gammon -- Thursday, 2 July 2009, at 2:06 a.m.
    • a question of 3-aw 3-aw maniac
      aoleg1 -- Wednesday, 1 July 2009, at 1:05 p.m.
      • Zadeh MET=garbage *NM*
        neilkaz -- Wednesday, 1 July 2009, at 4:35 p.m.
        • Zadeh MET=garbage
          MaX -- Thursday, 2 July 2009, at 7:28 a.m.
  • xG 3-ply ROLLOUT Hmmmmm - 32 backgame
    Robert-Jan Veldhuizen (Zorba) -- Monday, 6 July 2009, at 4:13 p.m.
    • xG 3-ply ROLLOUT Hmmmmm - 32 backgame
      eXtreme Gammon -- Friday, 10 July 2009, at 3:00 a.m.
      • xG 3-ply ROLLOUT Hmmmmm - 32 backgame
        Robert-Jan Veldhuizen (Zorba) -- Monday, 13 July 2009, at 6:04 p.m.