Talk:Anti-Surfer Challenge/Results

From Robowiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Hmm... Voidious, I think it is Diamond, not Dookious? » Nat | Talk » 14:11, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

Oops... No, these are the Dookious gun results from our pre-vote testing, I just filled in the wrong gun type. Thanks, --Voidious 14:20, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

Wow, +13 against YersiniaPestis? Really?? If that's not a discrepancy in the order of bots in your .rrc file, I am incredibly impressed. =) Nice work! --Voidious 20:57, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Oh my! This is incredibly impressive! I'm quite curious about what kind of changes led to this incredible result! :) --Rednaxela 21:24, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, I thought the high score against YP was weird too -- there are a lot of 99% scores although some dip down to the mid-70s. But it's held up over 50 rounds and I used the .rrc and bots from the zip file so it's not like I'm doing anything different. This is using too. I guess zyx has some work to do?

What's different? This is the version I alluded to on my talk page, using a slightly different set of targeting data and double the number of RBF inputs. Making for a really large number of NN weights. I've hesitated using this targeting in Holden, since the cpu usage may become too high when combined with wave surfing. On the TC2K7 this gun scores about 0.5 higher than the posted score for Gaff; it still can't break 88 in the TCRM though.

--Darkcanuck 21:53, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Nice work, Voidious! Competition is good... =) --Darkcanuck 21:55, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! I couldn't be happier with big boosts in both PL and APS. An unbiased VG got 72.51, but my AS gun alone got only 71.71. The final 1.34 is a VG with a heavy bias against the AS gun at medium to high hit percentages. Looks like we've got even more competition from Navajo now, too. =) Nice job, dude! --Voidious 23:20, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Wow, nice scores Navajo! There is such a thing as too much competition, you know... Will Gibbs be entering the rumble anytime soon? --Darkcanuck 23:24, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

It deppends on what do you mean by soon, but I think until April next year I will enter it on the rumble, its movement still needs a lot of work, and it still isn't that good at TCRM. Also, I have some interesting ideas I'm willing to try before releasing it. As a side note, the DC part from 1.160 is a very simple one I worte, debugged and optimized in something like 2 hours using Rednaxela's kd tree, while the 1.170cDC is a version using one single pure DC gun alone very optimized. However, when I tried to implement this last DC gun together with the rest of the bot the overall preformance decreased, and a deeper analysis revealed it was actually worse, and its results were better because it caused the bots to activate their flatteners later... --Navajo 23:44, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
April is not really "soon". =) Don't be afraid of releasing early, it can help pinpoint areas where your bot is stronger or weaker than you thought. I first released Gaff with a terrible movement and after improving that for a while moved on to some better ideas with other bots. (J.W. Gibbs or the BeeGees?) --Darkcanuck 03:59, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
Neither, though it is a shame I didn't think of J.W. Gibbs. I took the name from a character from a tv series named NCIS--Navajo 22:00, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

Wow, great work guys. I obviously have a bit of catching up to do. Now, I hate to sound like a party pooper, but with all these new high scores, would everybody just triple check that they're only firing with 3.0 power bullets? =) It's a mistake I've made a few times, and firing lower power bullets (for me) boosts scores about 5%. --Skilgannon 07:23, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

I certainly am... --Voidious 13:53, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

Sorry I took so long to answer, I had classes all day log. Gibbs is surely firring power 3 bullets all the time, except when its own energy is less than 3. If I remember correctly it doesn't even have any sort of energy management since 1.140 when I dropped all features that were not part of my current development proccess so that I wouldn't need to care about fixing problems in temporary parts of the bot, but now that Darkcanuck made me curious about how it would do in the rumble I might develop a simple movement this weekend and release a "preview version". --Navajo 21:42, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for checking =) Looks like I need to find time to do some anti-surfer research =) --Skilgannon 11:59, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Hmm... I should really get back into this some time. Anyway, nice stuff there with that latest update Navajo. So, April 2010 you were saying before for when we might Gibbs in the rumble? It's now April 2010, feeling just about ready? :) --Rednaxela 15:31, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

There are no threads on this page yet.