[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Bug-gnubg] random dice generator? hahahaaa

From: Rich Heimlich
Subject: Re: [Bug-gnubg] random dice generator? hahahaaa
Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2017 13:13:28 -0400

This is scientifically proven to be a losing proposition. Every study on this issue shows that humans remember negative stimuli  far more than positive stimuli. 

That said, that does not mean an effort shouldn't be made to attempt to offset this. For example, one way that I believe might help some people on this would be of the product supported some sort of hypothetical online dice rolling app that was coded to work for all sorts of apps like D&D, craps, monopoly, etc. 

It would be rather more difficult to suggest that such a product neutral app could possibly be cheating. It could show a log of the rolls so that people couldn't argue that gnubg just claims to connect to it bit either does not or simply changes the rolls after the fact. 

Telling someone to roll their own dice doesn't work because it's too time consuming whereas connecting to a dice app takes only minutely more time than normal. 

On Wed, Aug 23, 2017 at 8:28 PM, tchow <address@hidden> wrote:
On 2017-08-21 16:40, Philippe Michel wrote:
The involved math is too hard for me, but wouldn't using low
discrepancy sequences
(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Low-discrepancy_sequence) instead of a
random order decrease the variance for rollouts with any number of
trials (possibly only slightly, with variance reduction already
helping a lot).

In principle, yes, but as I understand it, eXtreme Gammon doesn't use quasi-random dice and its variance doesn't seem to suffer much.  If this is true then I would infer that low-discrepancy sequences won't reduce the variance much.

Something that might have a better chance of yielding superior results is to use 1-ply or even 2-ply for the variance reduction computation instead of 0-ply, at least for the first or second steps of a rollout trial.  Obviously this would slow things down but it's conceivable to me that the improved accuracy of the luck estimate might compensate for it, so that fewer rollout trials would be needed to drive down the variance.


Bug-gnubg mailing list

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]