• Murat's first mutant cube script experiment and preliminary results

    From MK@21:1/5 to All on Sat Jan 27 19:06:39 2024
    Okay folks, I think I have a properly working script
    for a mutant that randomly doubles and/or takes but
    never drops, against Noo-BG World-Class cube skill,
    with both sides set to World-Class checker skill.

    It can recycle the 4,096 cube limit multiple times
    In my first session of 100 games the cube got as
    high as 2^34 = 17,179,869,184

    I will share my script and preliminary results with
    you all, as soon as I get some guesses from you guys
    about what percentage of the games the mutant will
    win and how many points each side will win, after a
    long enough session that you may deem as significant.

    It runs really fast. It took me about 15 minutes to
    run 100 games with a total of 5,788 moves, with the
    longest game lasting 133 moves. So, we can expect to
    run 10,000 games in about 24 hours.

    I did go out of my way to document it with lots of
    comments to make easier for anyone to run it as is
    or to modify it to run their own experiments, even
    people who may be just learning coding in general
    and specifically in Python.

    So, let me hear your predictions. Don't be shy now. ;)

    MK

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From MK@21:1/5 to All on Wed Feb 7 19:58:42 2024
    On 1/27/2024 7:06 PM, MK wrote:

    So, let me hear your predictions. Don't be shy now. ;)

    Don't you guys feel bad here. They don't know in the
    Noo-BG group either. ;) :(

    Since I posted the above, I really got into improving my
    scripts and coming up with more mutant experiment ideas.

    Currently I'm running five different scripts, with some
    done and some still going. Then I'll do yet two or three
    more different ones.

    Below is what I just posted to Noo-BG group about a new
    experiment based on an old idea of mine.

    I wonder if the resident math PHD's of RGB will be able
    to better answer the questions at the bottom?

    MK


    I'm chugging along with my mutant cube skill experiments
    as I can spare time, saving all games, which I will share
    on my web site, when I'm done, along with my scripts.

    While doing the double at > 50% experiment, I remembered
    an old question I had asked in RGB about a year ago: What
    if the winner of the opening roll is allowed pre-double?

    See thread: https://groups.google.com/g/rec.games.backgammon/c/BVEnaqGM6dg/m/2c685q4DAAAJ

    When you evaluate the opening position in GnuBG, this is
    what you get:

    =========================================================
    Position ID: 4HPwATDgc/ABMA
    Match ID: cAkAAAAAAAAA

    Evaluator: Contact
    Win W(g) W(bg) L(g) L(bg) Equity Cubeful
    static: 52.1 15.4 0.8 13.0 0.8 +0.067 +0.084
    1 ply: 52.7 14.8 0.9 12.9 0.5 +0.076 +0.098
    2 ply: 52.5 14.9 0.7 12.5 0.5 +0.076 +0.099

    Cube analysis
    2-ply cubeless equity +0.076
    52.5 14.9 0.7 - 47.5 12.5 0.5
    Cubeful equities:
    1. No double +0.099
    2. Double, pass +1.000 (+0.901)
    3. Double, take -0.171 (-0.270)
    Proper cube action: No double, take (23.0%) =========================================================

    I have created a Python script to intervene if the human
    player wins the opening roll, to set the cube at 2 owned
    by the bot, and then to execute "end game" command, for
    the bot to play for both sides at the same checker and
    cube skill settings.

    So, you know the equity gained by winning the opening
    roll and the equity lost by making the cube error at
    the same time, before the first move. Can anyone tell
    me what I will be expecting to see after, let's say,
    10,000 games, in terms of which side will win/lose by
    what percentage?

    BTW: I already know. ;) I'm asking to see how confident
    are you in GnuBG's equity and/or error calculations and
    how competent are you to make mathematical predictions?

    MK

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Axel Reichert@21:1/5 to playbg-rgb@yahoo.com on Thu Feb 8 09:38:26 2024
    MK <playbg-rgb@yahoo.com> writes:

    I have a properly working script for a mutant that randomly doubles
    and/or takes but never drops, against Noo-BG World-Class cube skill,
    with both sides set to World-Class checker skill.

    Good!

    It can recycle the 4,096 cube limit multiple times In my first session
    of 100 games the cube got as high as 2^34 = 17,179,869,184

    Welcome to St. Petersburg! I assume that you also allowed beavers,
    possibly unlimited?

    guesses from you guys about what percentage of the games the mutant
    will win and how many points each side will win

    The percentage will be below 50 %, probably below 40 %. The points won
    will be essentially large random numbers due to the Petersburg
    paradox. And also this will not stabilize if you run longer sessions,
    but only get worse.

    Axel

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From MK@21:1/5 to Axel Reichert on Fri Feb 9 03:04:38 2024
    On 2/8/2024 1:38 AM, Axel Reichert wrote:

    MK <playbg-rgb@yahoo.com> writes:

    ... mutant that randomly doubles and/or takes but never drops,

    It can recycle the 4,096 cube limit multiple times In my first
    session of 100 games the cube got as high as 2^34 = 17,179,869,184

    Welcome to St. Petersburg! I assume that you also allowed beavers,
    possibly unlimited?

    Only 2 consecutive beavers, (Noo-BG default setting), but with
    cube recycling beyond the 4096 limit and games lasting longer
    due to mutant not dropping, beaver-raccoon sequences happened
    enough time to end up in Petropavlovsk, Kamchatskly... :)

    guesses from you guys about what percentage of the games the
    mutant will win and how many points each side will win

    The percentage will be below 50 %, probably below 40 %.

    If you are talking about the number of games won/lost, I didn't
    count since that doesn't matter at all in money games, where the
    object is to win more points (money) than games, by demonstrating
    better "cube skill".

    The points won will be essentially large random numbers due to
    the Petersburg paradox.

    The equities aren't undefined, if that's what you are getting at,
    but humanly incomprehensible because of astronomical cube values.

    When I posted about this in Noo-BG group, I was told I may need
    to run hundreds of thousand or even a million games, in order to
    get meaningful results but now I'm thinking if ten million will
    be enough.

    I run my experiments in chunks of 1,000 games so that I can save
    them in reasonable sgf file sizes. For this experiment, I ran
    30,000 games with mutant winning 549,877,108,651 against bot's
    55,937,020,736, i.e. 90.7666365% in one batch and 80,937,311
    against bot's 18,014,435,569,901,100, i.e. 0.0000004%

    This is not an experiment I originally intended to do bot done
    anyway just out of curiosity. Mutant winning as little as 2-3%
    would help my argument but there is no practical way to finish
    this experiment. I'm a potato counter. I don't trust math and
    mirrors extrapolations. Thus, I will abandon this experiment
    and won't spend anymore time on it.

    It was fun and interesting to see how high the cube could go in
    a single game if it wasn't arbitrarily limited at 1,024 or 4,096.

    And also this will not stabilize if you run longer sessions,
    but only get worse.

    I don't agree but maybe I don't understand what you mean? I'd
    argue that it will eventually stabilize but I have no idea of
    how long of a session may be needed for that to happen.

    I'm continuing with my other experiments and truly enjoying the
    process. In fact, while doing the ones I originally wanted to
    do, I came up with new ideas and have been squeezing them in
    as well. Stay tuned. I think we all will learn from them...

    MK

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)