[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Bug-gnubg] Suggestion: equivalent # of games played in roll outs th
Re: [Bug-gnubg] Suggestion: equivalent # of games played in roll outs thx to var. reduction
Tue, 14 Oct 2003 13:23:43 +0000
On Tue, Oct 14, 2003 at 02:49:15PM +0200, olivier croisille wrote
> I'm aware that the issue was raised in the past various times, I'd just
> like to know the current status, if any :
> - is it on the agenda at all?
yes, it's noted on the TODO list.
> - is it on the agenda but with a very low priority level? (which would
> perfectly make sense, regarding a more or less cosmetic feature)
noone is working on it
> - is it hard to compute
To compute it you need the ratio between the calculated standard error
without variance reduction and the calculated standard error with
variance reduction. The equivalent #games varies with the square of this
ratio, e.g., a 36 game rollout where the SE without and with VR is 0.01
and 0.005, respectively, the #equiv games is 4*36=144.
I'm guessing that we need to save the non-VR equity and SE (internally
and externally) in order to be able to resume rollouts. This is the
critical point, as it requires changes to many places in gnubg.
> Incidentally, on the 'promotion' side (if ever needed) I think this would
> show even better the top quality of roll outs enabled by Gnubg
Personally I don't find the #equiv games that interesting. The SEs and
JSDs are much more interesting -- it doesn't help you much to know that
your rollouts is equivalent to 10,000 games if the two moves you're
rolling out are only separated by one tenth of a SE.
All rollouts are normally performed with VR, so what's the point of
knowing that the #equiv games for a non-VR rollout, since nobody would
do such a rollout (unless they only have S3.2 and enable chequer play
according to score).
Other opinions on this subject?
Description: PGP signature