Oski bot Word games
27 replies. Last post: 2014-06-26
Reply to this topic Return to forum-
antony at 2011-04-05
Hi all,
I have written a new Oski-playing bot, “bear_bot”. It currently proposes unrated games only.
It will register for rated games or monthly cups if there is enough approval for that.
Please give it a try!
Antony
-
antony at 2011-04-05
By the way, it seems that I cannot edit my profile anymore. Do you have the same bug?
-
FatPhil at 2011-04-05
There seem to be rules about what you can change to too, in order to avoid spoofing, I think. Good to see another game covered by a bot - which ones are we missing now?
-
antony at 2011-04-05
My master just found a nasty bug, I should play better now.
FatPhil: Let's make a list of bots playing here, (and bots widely available).
Go -> fuego
Chess -> (many)
SHOGI -> (many)
Reversi -> (many)
Reversi on board 10x10 -> (many)
Gomoku -> ?
Dots and Boxes -> ?
DVONN -> RoRoRo
Four in row -> ?
Twixt PP -> ?
Hex -> (a few)
Amazons -> (a few)
Breakthrough -> ?
Lines of Action -> MIA (in classic)
Connect6 -> ?
Havannah -> (many)
WYPS ->
OSKI -> bear_bot
Golem word game -> RoRoRo, probably other
StreetSoccer -> nano_ai ?
EinStein würfelt nicht! -> RoRoRo (not backwards)
-
antony at 2011-04-05
[previous message was a bug and the one before should be read as posted by bear_bot, posted from my account]
-
antony at 2011-04-07
I feel better now :-)
Carroll: I will add support for French soon (basically it's just downloading the ODS and writing some extra webpage-parsing code…)
If people want to play in other languages, please tell me what the word list in that language is.
-
antony at 2011-04-07
… yet another second-player loss for him. Well done michael!
I really have to implement add a decent lookahead now…
-
antony at 2011-04-07
French support now in! Also the code makes it easy for me now to add any other language, as long as you provide the word list to me :-)
-
Carroll at 2011-04-08
Oh merci!
Mais sans “recherche d'arbre” il est déjà trop fort pour moi (au moins en français).
-
antony at 2011-04-10
I've done some basic tests with 1-ply lookahead. With either or both players having it, P2 seems still advantaged by approx. 2 pts. Surprising, isn't it?
-
Carroll at 2011-04-10
Antony, have you seen the discussions in the thread http://www.littlegolem.net/jsp/forum/topic2.jsp?forum=25&topic=190, where Ed Colins and Richard both made simulations that agreed with this phenomenon without any clear explanation?
-
antony at 2011-04-11
Yes, but I use the whole dictionary and can have lookahead (well, actually, I'm not doing a *real* lookahead, but comparing the ~10 words that usually tie for highest scoring in any move). And 10-letter words do occur every so often…
So to be more precise, with 1000 games simulated:
no matter whether none, one or both players use 1-ply (restricted) lookahead, I get ~80% wins for P2, 10% draws and 10% wins for P1; and the mean margin of victory is 2.1 or 2.2 for P2.
I intend to add alpha-beta pruning to my code to do 2-ply (restricted) lookahead in a reasonable amount of time.
-
antony at 2011-04-13
Still didn't have the time to add 2-ply lookahead, but some speed improvements are under the way.
I would like to hold a vote about participation of my bot in the MCs and the Championship: who would agree, who would disagree? I intend to enter it with a time limit of a few seconds at most per move. (What are the standards for other bots in other games?)
-
FatPhil at 2011-04-13
RoRoRo only takes a few seconds over each move max. 4ir and D&B he's about half a second (and for D&B, that's a perl script, it's not even C). Due to some sloppy coding, he will occasionally go insane and spend up to about 10-15s on a move at Dvonn, even though he's trying to average only a few seconds. (He estimates how effective alpha-beta pruning will be, but sometimes it doesn't deliver the speedup he predicts.)
-
antony at 2011-04-14
I'm (in the process of) getting thrashed by michael again… I really have to add lookahead now :P
-
antony at 2011-04-16
So I've added a lookahead function. I still assume that it is never good to “sacrifice” a point by playing a non-highest-scoring move (it would be necessary only if it created a TWO-point reduction in the value of the position for the opponent…)
I had it solve completely 1000 games starting from the 8th move, and it used ~4 moves lookahead before the 8th, except for the very first few moves (where the branching factor is the biggest), as P1; P2 followed a greedy strategy of choosing a highest scoring move at random.
Even then, P1 scores only 31.4% of victories, and 24.5% of draws (mean margin of victory is 0.2pt)! That is much better, but means that the game is even more unbalanced than I thought.
-
michael at 2011-04-17
“I still assume that it is never good to “sacrifice” a point by playing a non-highest-scoring move (it would be necessary only if it created a TWO-point reduction in the value of the position for the opponent…)”
In our last game I made 'peason' in move 15 instead of 'resales'. 'Peason' gave u only a 6 max response in move 16 while 'resales' would've given u an 8 letter response with 'unreason'. It didn't really matter that much in our game cause I would've still won by 1 point instead of 2. But you can see it would matter if the margin was only 1 point at move 15.
-michael
-
bear_bot at 2014-03-21
bear_bot's strength is currently set to 2-ply lookahead, after some players complained that the initial setting (5-ply) was too strong. Now that the first division championship has been decided (and bear_bot hasn't won :-(), would the players in that division like to play against a stronger bot? Please let me know here.
-
gamesorry ★ at 2014-03-25
It's fine for me since you are not dominating the tournament now. But I'm not sure about the others;)
-
Nagy Fathy at 2014-03-25
It is ok with me too, I like to play with stronger players, increase the initial setting and let us see :)