Robot Tournaments Robots Need Improvement
#1
Posted 2009-September-23, 19:10
#2
Posted 2009-September-23, 19:44
Gib usually declares fairly well, if the time controls are set reasonably. Maybe the tourneys are having them play too fast. But in any case there's no heuristic for "drawing trumps", that's not how the software thinks. It calculates what line will work best percentage wise at each turn, which may or may not involve playing trumps.
#3
Posted 2009-September-23, 21:24
Zeit
#4
Posted 2009-September-23, 21:52
My disclaimer is that I am really enjoying these tournaments.
Practice Goodwill and Active Ethics
Director "Please"!
#5
Posted 2009-September-24, 04:37
If I were in charge of GIB development, I would at the moment give higher priority to improving bidding decisions than to improve play. But I am sure Fred has his priorities straight, and GIB's bidding has improved a lot over the last year. Fred always listens to constructive criticism, so if you have some concrete hands that illustrate what appears to be a general problem, you may send them to Fred.
#6
Posted 2009-September-24, 09:38
Practice Goodwill and Active Ethics
Director "Please"!
#7
Posted 2009-September-24, 09:40
#8
Posted 2009-September-24, 09:41
#9
Posted 2009-September-24, 09:43
mtvesuvius, on Sep 24 2009, 10:41 AM, said:
Bids 3NT and 4♠ way too often.
#10
Posted 2009-September-24, 10:25
As to its declarer play, sometimes it takes lines that I would not have taken but at least it goes by fast and I can go on to the next hand:)
#11
Posted 2009-September-24, 10:55
#12
Posted 2009-September-24, 11:04
jdonn, on Sep 24 2009, 10:40 AM, said:
That sound like: A: "I find it unacceptable that we are spending so much money on health care in the US and still have so many people without insurance not getting the help they need." B: "That just shows you just don't understand how health care in the USA works."
#13
Posted 2009-September-24, 11:15
peachy, on Sep 24 2009, 11:25 AM, said:
A second thing is that GIB leaves in takeout doubles that should never have been left in, and similarly, it never makes a penalty double.
<edit>
I believe GiB's failure to make certain penalty doubles is that almost all doubles are defined as "takeout". Maybe this is a system card error, but when I make a Double of the oppenent's game or slam contracts, the double is explained as "takeout". GiB always leaves the doubles in anyway, but I'm wondering if this may have something to do with it...
#14
Posted 2009-September-24, 11:51
cherdanno, on Sep 24 2009, 12:04 PM, said:
jdonn, on Sep 24 2009, 10:40 AM, said:
That sound like: A: "I find it unacceptable that we are spending so much money on health care in the US and still have so many people without insurance not getting the help they need." B: "That just shows you just don't understand how health care in the USA works."
I don't think that's a good analogy, and not just because Gib is a toy. When they fix the bidding they make corrections or slight changes to the code. Fixing the play would involve rewriting the code entirely in a different way, in other words writing a new program altogether.
In other words, the healthcare system could be changed in major ways and still be the healthcare system. Gib could not be changed in this way because then it wouldn't be Gib. So the only constructive element to complaints like this are really for someone to write a new bridge-playing robot and for BBO to use that instead of Gib.
#15
Posted 2009-September-24, 11:52
mtvesuvius, on Sep 24 2009, 12:15 PM, said:
peachy, on Sep 24 2009, 11:25 AM, said:
A second thing is that GIB leaves in takeout doubles that should never have been left in, and similarly, it never makes a penalty double.
<edit>
I believe GiB's failure to make certain penalty doubles is that almost all doubles are defined as "takeout". Maybe this is a system card error, but when I make a Double of the oppenent's game or slam contracts, the double is explained as "takeout". GiB always leaves the doubles in anyway, but I'm wondering if this may have something to do with it...
A common type of Dbl that it leaves in is like (1H) P (2H) P P DBL I have stopped balancing in robot tourneys... and if I do, it will be a bid in a suit because GIB does not understand balancing at all. However, after balancing in a suit, Gib has no problem raising...
#16
Posted 2009-September-24, 12:31
jdonn, on Sep 24 2009, 12:51 PM, said:
cherdanno, on Sep 24 2009, 12:04 PM, said:
jdonn, on Sep 24 2009, 10:40 AM, said:
That sound like: A: "I find it unacceptable that we are spending so much money on health care in the US and still have so many people without insurance not getting the help they need." B: "That just shows you just don't understand how health care in the USA works."
I don't think that's a good analogy, and not just because Gib is a toy. When they fix the bidding they make corrections or slight changes to the code. Fixing the play would involve rewriting the code entirely in a different way, in other words writing a new program altogether.
In other words, the healthcare system could be changed in major ways and still be the healthcare system. Gib could not be changed in this way because then it wouldn't be Gib. So the only constructive element to complaints like this are really for someone to write a new bridge-playing robot and for BBO to use that instead of Gib.
You seem to know a lot about GIB. For example, apparently you know that it is impossible to automatically generate more simulations with bad breaks when random simulations do not yield significant differences between various lines. And you know that many similar ideas that I didn't come up with while thinking about it for 2 mins are impossible to implement either?
In any case, there is a difference between saying "here is a problem" and saying "XYZ should fix this problem!". I can complain about the disastrous state of public transport in the USA even if I know that this is almost impossible to fix.
Anyway, welcome back
#17
Posted 2009-September-24, 14:14
cherdanno, on Sep 24 2009, 01:31 PM, said:
I have roomed with Ari several times lately and talked a lot to him about it over the past few months. I'd go out on a limb and say other than the programmers themselves I know more about how Gib works than just about anyone.
Quote
That wouldn't be impossible. Here are the problems (just that I can think of off my head right now.)
- It would make Gib extremely slow. Already the general complaint is that it runs too many simulations when it doesn't need to, and it would make that problem even worse.
- You would need to either run the sims for bad breaks in each suit (even slower) or decide somehow which suits are important.
- You would have to rerun the sims at each trick that goes by if the trump isn't immediately drawn (even slower).
- There is always the chance that those sims lead Gib to make the wrong play anyway so the problem would be diminished but not eliminated.
I don't know that there are or aren't other ideas, but they probably involve huge changes that would either slow Gib down way too much, or be equivalent to rewriting the program anyway like I said.
Quote
Anyway, welcome back
Complain about whatever you want. I didn't say not to complain, I was just saying complaining about this particular problem (with the expectation that there is a fix any time remotely soon) shows someone probably doesn't understand how Gib decides on its plays.
Good to be back.
#18
Posted 2009-September-24, 20:41
#19
Posted 2009-September-25, 15:41
Vampyr, on Sep 24 2009, 10:41 PM, said:
Tournaments on BBO where each human plays by himself at a table with 3 GIB robots, competing against other humans at similar tables. There are two kinds:
1. Robot Race or Robot Rewards: You all get randomly dealt hands, different at each table, you play as many hands as you can in the time allotted, and at the end you're compared on a total points basis with all the other tourney entrants. Robot Race tourneys are less expensive ($0.25 US) and the leaders only win BBO masterpoints. Robot Rewards are more expensive ($1 and $5), and the leaders get a share of the pot.
2. Robot Duplicate: This is like a normal Matchpoint duplicate tourney, except with robots at the table instead of other humans. All tables play the same boards, and they're matchpointed.
#20
Posted 2009-September-26, 10:44