Rankings Stable

From RoboWiki
Jump to: navigation, search
Revision as of 19 June 2018 at 22:47.
The [/w/index.php?title=Talk:LiteRumble&offset=20180619224732&lqt_mustshow=6273 highlighted comment] was edited in this revision. [diff]

It seems that both 1v1 and melee now shows "Rankings Stable" instead of "Rankings Not stable".

I once thought that "Rankings Not Stable" is hardcoded to show that the rankings are never stable so one should always run more battles.

But today is the first time I noticed "Rankings Stable", quite surprising.

So, what's the mechanism behind "Rankings Stable" and "Rankings Not Stable"? Is "Rankings Stable" displayed whenever every bot gets a full pairings?

    Xor (talk)05:14, 17 June 2018

    Your observation coincide with mine. Once all bots paired with each other at least once, the ranking get the stable status. Sometimes it does not happen for a long time because of missing bots or some bots crashing with a newer version of robocode. This is why the participants list sometimes get pruned.

    If the ranking is unstable for a long time, I usually look which bot is missing a pair and search for a reason in the rumble client log.

    Usually, stabilization takes about a day for each new bot.

      Beaming (talk)14:57, 17 June 2018

      Yeah, Monk gets an incorrect url for nearly half a year, making newly updated bots missing that pairing. And in 1v1 there are more bots having problems with current settings (robocode and Java 8).

      Should we have a clean up, or create a new rumble to remove bots having compatibility problem, which only adds noice to the rumble?

        Xor (talk)02:08, 18 June 2018

        I personally oscillating between "if the author does not care, why should I?" and "preserve the history". If you are in the second camp, let me remind about my FixingParticipantLinks script which relinks missing bots to strange automata archive.

        What is our problem with Java 8? Do we already have bots with Java 9? Or robocode itself is not backward compatible and you see it on big enough robot pull?

          Beaming (talk)14:35, 18 June 2018

          My opinion is that as long as a bot works fine on current settings (robocode and Java 8), we should "preserve the history". But once it produces random result (e.g. crashing half of the time), we should remove it (until the author should fix it).

          Bots known to crash on some machines:

          apc.Caan 1.0
          dam.MogBot 2.9
          sgp.JollyNinja 3.53
            Xor (talk)01:47, 19 June 2018

            I've been away for quite some time and I'll probably come back once I graduate. I still care about my bots, though (despite Monk being buggy as hell atm). I used to make use of Drive to provide the links, but I didn't know they would break after some time. What would you guys suggest me to do? Is the solution proposed above (fix script) sufficient for now?

              Rsalesc (talk)22:46, 19 June 2018

              Confirmed, it changes to Stable when all bots have full pairings.

              If you find a bot that repeatedly crashes IMO remove it from the rumble and out it in the list below. If the author has a page make a comment and hopefully they will fix it.

                Skilgannon (talk)15:53, 19 June 2018
                Personal tools