View source for Talk:WaveSim

Still ironing out some issues here and there, but damn this is cool. =) Time to run normal battles, 20 seasons x 48 bots: 4.75 hours (on 2 threads). Time to run the same gun against the raw data: ~10 minutes. :-D Plus you don't have to hope randomness averages out over the battles - it's the same data every time. --Voidious 23:37, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

Neat stuff here! Actually, back when working on RougeDC, I once had something akin to this set up for quick testing, but I never really used it extensively or made it robust. I wonder if I should set up a robust framework for this for my future targeting experiments. --Rednaxela 23:52, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

I actually wondered if you ever had. =) It's a funny combination of "wow this is so cool!" and "you know this is sooo nothing special." Back when I had access to MATLAB at school, I did play with a wave data set with some SVMs, but other than that I haven't explored testing my classification algorithms outside of Robocode. But I still have the desire to try a lot of clustering experiments, so taking a few days to set this up was well worth it! --Voidious 23:59, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for opening source TripHammer which is a very useful tool for recording waves! However, after analyzing data recorded by TripHammer, I found a bug in its implementation.

TripHammer is logging EndRoundRecord when it receives onWin or onDeath, however, both may fire at the same round (e.g. you killed the opponent, and later you are killed as well), which causes EndRoundRecord getting logged twice.

But what affects more is that in rare cases, no EndRoundRecord is logged, making the battle data "34" rounds long.

Btw, there seems a typo in "TRADITIONAL_WAVE_END_SIGNATURE" where the second "I" is missing in the source ;)

Hi, I was trying to do something like WaveSim before I found it but I think that WaveSim is better. I tried to download it but dijitari.com is closed. Can you please do something about it?

Was just thinking it might be cool to add support for having a movement algorithm decide whether shots hit or not, instead of pre-gathered data. You could create a simple pseudo-surfer that runs quite fast, I think. Maybe I could also write a system to generate an algorithm that behaves like an already gathered data set.

WaveSim could also stand to be a lot easier to use. Thinking I might get it up on GitHub and touch it up a little sometime.

WaveSim looks great to genetic tune your gun classification. And would probably be the biggest improvement to Combat.

But what about movement and energy management? I wonder how people here tune them.

I've never done any genetic tuning outside of WaveSim for gun classification, but I've thought about it. At first it seems like I'd want to be able to, from Java code, modify some other Java code and package it into a Robocode bot, copy that bot into my RoboRunner robots dir, then run battles. That always seemed really cumbersome to me.

But I think a much simpler approach is to just have one packaged bot that you always run, it reads in the DNA string from a file and interprets it however you like, then your genetic algorithm code just modifies the input file and runs more battles. This is the approach I'd take. Once it's done, you can convert it to real hard-coded behavior if you like. Especially if you're tuning a MiniBot (or smaller), you'd probably want to remove the file reading code.

Unfortunately genetic tuning is very long and tedious if you do it with a whole robot. Genetics also happens to cheat, so you need a good sample size to test against. I have genetically evolved a robot that could perfectly defeat walls from a certain starting position for example. But no where else.

That's pretty cool you tried it with overall robot behavior. That's definitely on another level in terms of complexity. I think that's usually the distinction between "Genetic Algorithms" (your code interprets the "DNA" string and alters its behavior in predefined ways) and "Genetic Programming" (your "DNA" string is translated into real code that itself is run as the bot's behavior).

It was the latter. It took about 100 generations (each generation with 1000 randomly mutated samples). I didn't take into consideration genetics natures. I thought it would evolve like how we write robots. You know a radar, some basic back and forth movement. Nope, everything spinned, it just happened it stumbled upon a perfect speed and turning ratio to move from its start location (to dodge all walls shots) and a perfect speed to spin its gun and fire to hit walls.

But this was from specific stating positions and angles, which I had programmed into the battle to remove all the extra 'noise' so I could run shorter battles and still get a good sample. Since neither walls or the robots genetics had any random function, I figured it was safe.

After all that work, I decided not to pursue it further. Since it was long boring, and I could write a better robot in 5 minutes.

Preserving the 'noise' is useful in these situations to avoid over-fitting. Although using only Walls in the fitness function will still produce a bot which is only good against it.

Going to be trying this out to tune my gun, which is otherwise very simple. Since I somewhat don't have as much patience to run the millions of battles otherwise required. Thanks!

First however I have to download the 2 gb of test data. :)

Cool, good luck! I have a newer/bigger data set that I'll upload now too. It was collected with an updated TripHammer, based on the post-refactor Diamond code base, and it's 10k battles. The file format is the same, but I did tweak/fix some small things in that refactor, like part of the precise MEA calculations.

10k battles of 35 rounds. So that is about 10 seasons?

It's 25 seasons of a 400 bot test bed using 35-round battles. Upon realizing it's 12 gigs, I'm splitting it into 5-season chunks for easier downloading. =)

Thanks for that! :)

Got the first 2 posted: [1] [2] I'll put proper links on the page when all 5 are up, should be by end of day.