[Bug-gnubg] Re: Requested gnubgautorc

[Michael Petch]

Interestingly enough, after doing some experiments (with evaluations, not rollouts), I am unsure there is a “bug” here. The position seems very volatile if you factor in potential future cube decisions. It may just be a fluke that 1 and 2 ply got it right (It didn’t look deep enough to see future cube actions). I’d like to hear feedback from others on this.

With that in mind I asked GnuBG to tell me (as an experiment) what the result would be if the checker play evaluations on cube decisions were cubeless, and except for 0 ply everything came out Double/take.

On a side note, and I am wondering how other people feel about this. On the Hint screen (or on analysis pane for analyzed positions) you have the “0/1/2/3/4” buttons Each corresponds to a “cubeful N play evaluation”. I have always found this not be be very intuitive. My expectation would be that “0/1/2/3/4” would use the existing settings that you can see with “...” and simply change the ply level for cube and checker (and keep all other settings like cubeful/cubeless/noise/filter the same). I found myself wanting to do cubeless checker play evaluations on cube decisions and I kept having to click “...” change the ply level manually, click OK, then hit the Eval button. My view is that if I hit those buttons “0/1/2/3/4” I want to see the difference at each ply level with respect to  my current eval settings.

Michael

On 27/08/09 2:24 PM, "Neil Robins" <address@hidden> wrote:

> I have same result as initially on a different computer with 20090612 version.
> >  
> > ----- Original Message ----- 
> >  
> > From:  Michael  Petch <mailto:address@hidden>  
> >  
> > To: Neil Robins <mailto:address@hidden>  
> >  
> > Sent: Thursday, August 27, 2009 9:05  PM
> >  
> > Subject: Re: Requested gnubgautorc
> >  
> >
> >
> > Something is very bizarre. I’m going to try some  experiments with some internal features of Gnubg turned off. But as you  suggested in your post, exiting Gnubg and restarting alters the outcomes. but  then I have found sometimes all plies start giving the right output.
> >
> > On  27/08/09 1:43 PM, "Neil Robins" <address@hidden>  wrote:
> >
> >  
> > > Strangely, I am  yet to see a problem with any other position.