1st: pe.SandboxDT 1.91 57282 11700 2340 38574 4667 0 0 235 265 0 2nd: kawigi.sbf.TeancumPassive 15943 13250 2650 0 0 43 0 266 234 0 Index: 27.8%
Do I observe correctly that DT doesn't save data for matches when he's not in normal mode? -- Kawigi
Yes for reference (and challenge) purposes DT does not use, or save statistics on opponents (It saves people having to delete the data file before each run for their best score). DT does learn during the match so a 1000 round match is more difficult than a 100 round match) -- Paul Evans
1st: pe.SandboxDT 1.91 68183 15800 3160 42903 6320 0 0 316 184 0 2nd: rz.GlowBlowAPMRMC 11040 9200 1840 0 0 0 0 184 316 0 index: 16.19%shame on me. but I have to say that this is the same version I got the APMCIndex. I think I can get a better overall-index if I'd take the movement of the development version of GlowBlowAPM. -- rozu
Made an improvement that could globally improve all the Flood bots (except Nano), and it did even better :-) The nice thing is that it did just as good against the PatternMatcherBot:
1st: pe.SandboxDT 1.91 53523 10450 2090 36805 4177 0 0 209 291 0 2nd: kawigi.sbf.TeancumPassive 17498 14550 2910 0 0 38 0 291 209 0 index: 32.7Not bad? I might make an 'indexing' version of FloodMini to debug against, too, as he's how I've done curve-flattening tweaking in the recent past. -- Kawigi
DT's score - bot1 is the reference, bot 2 is the challenger:
1st: pe.SandboxDT 1.91 (1) 103946 18650 3730 74107 7459 0 0 373 627 0 2nd: pe.SandboxDT 1.91 (2) 37623 31350 6270 0 0 3 0 627 373 0--Paul Evans
Frankie 0.9.1mc:
Index 14.72%. Very dissapointing. I must go back to the drawing board with this. -- PEZ
1st: pe.SandboxDT 1.91 66406 14900 2980 42570 5956 0 0 298 202 0 2nd: cx.micro.AshRMC 0.7 12120 10100 2020 0 0 0 0 202 298 0 index:18.25%
It is very dissapointing too.~;-[ -- iiley
But mine is more dissapointing. =) -- PEZ
1st: pe.SandboxDT 1.91 63079 13750 2750 41086 5492 0 0 275 225 0 2nd: cx.micro.SparkRMC 0.6 13500 11250 2250 0 0 0 0 225 275 0 index:21.41%
hehe~~,Spark is better.But Frankie's APMC score is very good,PEZ. -- iiley
Yes, and that's strange, because I have really tried making the movement effective against DT and not cared about pattern matchers. Maybe I should do a Pooh-bear thing and do an APM movement instead. =) -- PEZ
Another attempt, this is the same one as is posted for APMChallenge, too (at 37.29% there):
1st: pe.SandboxDT 1.91 52107 9550 1910 36838 3808 0 0 191 309 0 2nd: kawigi.sbf.TeancumPassive 18674 15450 3090 0 0 134 0 309 191 0 Index: 35.84Staying about even on both fronts ;-) And here's how FloodMini's movement basically does:
1st: pe.SandboxDT 1.91 58837 12600 2520 38690 5027 0 0 252 248 0 2nd: kawigi.sbf.FloodMiniPassive 14931 12400 2480 0 0 51 0 248 252 0 Index: 25.38And I'm working on tweaking FloodHT's movement for flatness at long distances, here's what it is now:
1st: pe.SandboxDT 1.91 50253 9300 1860 35380 3713 0 0 186 314 0 2nd: kawigi.sbf.FloodRMC2 18913 15700 3140 0 0 73 0 314 186 0 Index: 37.64-- Kawigi
whoah! that's quite impressive ... and another second place for Paul ;-) Good job Kawigi! -- Vic
Hummm - do you want to try over 1000 rounds? -- Paul Evans
Does that really make such a difference? How many rounds would SandboxDT need to be ready learning? Personally i wouldn't have minded if SandboxDT started with a full data set of the challenger...-- Vic
Can't quite do that, since I'm in the process of mangling it further. Next time I'll do one, just to make you happy :-) That one came from a version of FloodRMC? that FloodMini identified as a tree-stump profile, from about -.3 to +.4. One nice thing about using FloodMini to test is it goes faster (probably because he only has one gun) :-) -- Kawigi
Ok, here's the current maglation. The profile (according to FloodMini, again) is less tree-stump-ish, but a little broader:
1st: pe.SandboxDT 1.91 102081 18400 3680 72656 7345 0 0 368 632 0 2nd: kawigi.sbf.FloodRMC2 38080 31600 6320 0 0 160 0 632 368 0 Index: 37.3And, for greater consistency, 1000 rounds 2 did something similar:
1st: pe.SandboxDT 1.91 100016 18450 3690 70514 7361 0 0 369 631 0 2nd: kawigi.sbf.FloodRMC2 38050 31550 6310 0 0 190 0 631 369 0 Index 38.04 - ooh, I think I'll use that :-)-- Kawigi
I'm impressed. Very impressed. You should probably use the lower index, because that's when DT's guns are working the best. Which brings me to answer Vics question on what difference it makes 500 or 1000 rounds. DT is a bit arbritrary in how fast it catches up with a movement. I ran a second 500 rounds with the same Frankie as above and only got an index of 12.3% then. (No, I won't use that, even though I should, I'm working on improving it instead.) Giving it 500 more rounds to figure removes some of the arbritrary quality of the index. But, I insist on using 500 rounds since DT takes forever to run on my machine. -- PEZ
You'll note that while the bullet damage in the second was lower than in the first, the survival rate was surprisingly basically the same (and it's actually one round worse in the second). My main point, though, is not that FloodRMC?'s movement is better than SandboxDT's, but rather that it currently has a comparable profile at long distances. -- Kawigi
Comfort for Paul: Second place is the best of the losers. =) -- PEZ
1st: pe.SandboxDT 1.91 498900 89950 17990 355062 35898 0 0 1799 3201 0 2nd: kawigi.sbf.FloodRMC2 193086 160050 32010 0 0 1026 0 3201 1799 0 Index: 38.7-- Kawigi
It's so impressing,Kawigi,i am thinking maybe one of Floods can beat SandboxDT now.~;] -- iiley
If DT's gun gets worse as time goes on it could be a bug - I'll have to investigate. -- Paul Evans
I don't have my usual 'learning' defense, on, either (I just stay far away, generally). I have a bug to hunt down in FloodMini's stat guns, as well, and if I fix it, I'll compare and see if I think something similar could have happened in DT. I'm guessing it's a rounding error or something? He observes a clear spike in a certain movement, and still loses to it for about 100 rounds. DT seems to take 30-50 rounds to figure out the same movement, and I don't have any idea why it should take so long. -- Kawigi
Frankie 0.9.2mc:
Index 16.34%. I don't know what to do about this. It might take a while before I get a 30+ index. -- PEZ
Hmmm... still not up to FloodMini in this category, how does Mako's movement do here? And what are you doing to evaluate your movement, using StatistRobot? You could consider using the FloodMiniStationary and grapher I uploaded with my "MCEntries" zip file on the repository. It seems like people should be able to effectively use it as a tweaking assistant, at least if you have some idea how to do stuff like "more on the right", "less at 0", or "more between the right and 0". And all the graphs are made so that the highest point is at the top, so you can see all the graphs well. -- Kawigi
Yes, StatistRobot. But I'll give FloodMiniStationary a good try now. Thanks! -- PEZ
Mako gets about equal results as Frankie here. I little bit better, if I can port the movement to Frankie it might be enough for me to climb a step in the combined index ladder. But it would feel like a step backwards so I'll keep trying with Frankie. -- PEZ
I just tested the latest Fractal and got an index of 6.2%. I'm so proud :) -- Vuen
Frankie 0.9.5:
Index 24.09%. Slow progress, but still progress. =) -- PEZ
I am running through the challenges now as I am trying to tune my movement profiles some. Here is a fist run of the new and improved Jekyl movement. Hopefully I will be able to tweak this enough to really get to an actual new release someday.
1st: pe.SandboxDT 1.91 124577 26950 5390 81489 10747 0 0 539 461 0 2nd: jekl.Jekyl 27985 23050 4610 0 0 325 0 461 539 0 Index: 22.45%I am not going to post this on the front page yet as I am not sure if this is the best I can do. -- jim
I'm starting now to test my robot agains the reference SandboxDT 1.91:
I set the bot as "reference" and I've disabled my firing
I get 0,7%
But I think that the CFC index will lead to a problem... if it happens that I beat the reference bot, (i have more point than him, I'll have an index higher than 100%... I know that it would be quite impossibile to beat the bot.. just in case -- Simonech
In the first challenge (PatternMatcherChallenge) it was required that you pass the 100% barrier to achive the challenge - so far we have only been able to make around 50% on this challenge but there is no reason why you should not be able to exceed 100% - go for it. -- Paul Evans
I am afraid CFC may not give you definitive answer about how flat is your movement. It will be just flattened with respect to DT 1.91 gun segmenting. My usual CFC index is rather low (24.5). Now in my experiments to make some poor-mans active-movement (to attempt to avoid places where opponent shoots most, so cheap try is to increase chances your bot go to such an offset when enemy bullet is fired and hang out there) I get higher CFC index (27-28) but it now loses badly to my reference enemies... -- Frakir
One of the problems with curve flattening is that it also flattens time! Some times you flatten your curve just to make your bot to show clear movement patterns when you unfold the bearing over time. -- Albert
Yeah... I found SandboxDT 2.11 movement is not so flat when your gun has some delta bearing segmenting: Lacrimas, Griffin (according to description it uses VertiLeach gun) can hit it allright -- Frakir
Though VertiLeach doesn't use delta bearing segmentation. But, Griffon does, and so does all my stat guns. Not that I have noticed that I can hit DT 2.11 though, quite the opposite. =) -- PEZ
Ouch, in VertiLeach condition you did registerAimFactor?(blah blah bearingDelta), didn't bother to scroll and check what bearingDelta means... --Frakir
No, I think you remember wrong. I do registerFactorVisits(factorArray, visitedIndex). Just before that I use bearingDelta to calculate what guess factor is visited. Verti uses ReducedDimensionalSegmentation using only the Y coordiniates of it's enemy. Actually I have just discovered that I still have bugs in that code. I have fixed them in the development version, but haven't yet tested if it makes Verti any stronger. -- PEZ
Heh... they're not bugs, they're features! -- Vuen
I'm almost agreeing here. =) In fact I can't see how the targeting works with that bug in place, but it does, which means maybe I was chewing mushrooms or something when I created the gun. -- PEZ
Jekyl's gun had some significant logical bugs until recently, and it did better against the Floods and against Cigaret I think before he fixed it. -- Kawigi
Yeah, maybe it is like Crippa says. "All characters in your bot code counts." Much like Dirk Gently's theory of "the fundamental interconnectedness of all things" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dirk_Gently). =) -- PEZ
The mind has amazing powers. It is able to subconsciencely intrepret your true intentions without you even understanding what you did. At least thats what I keep telling myself. -- jim
Shadow has an index of over 50%, doesn't that mean it should be above the dotted line? -- Tango
That's my understanding. I'm moving it and people are free to change that if for some reason I'm wrong. -- Kuuran
WOW! What an incredible score ABC. You are a true King! -- PEZ
question: what's the index here?
1st: rz.Aleph 56467 46850 9370 0 0 247 0 937 63 0 2nd: pe.SandboxDT 1.91 50777 3150 630 45763 1234 0 0 63 937 0-- rozu
Unless i'm very much mistaken it's 111.2%!!! Bloody hell rozu that's amazing!! --Brainfade
Way cool! Is it a dev version of Aleph or the one currently defending the Swiss colours? -- PEZ
it's the the dev version, though 0.33 would give nearly the same results. This is what AM is all about: you don't need to have a flat profile. the spikes should just be somewhere else then your opponent is currently firing. What I mean is, if the profile would be flatter DTs hitrate would be higher =). against DT 2.91 it looks different (its new gun is working :)). -- rozu
Well, the other problem is that you need to avoid GF1 like the plague against DT 1.91 if the BFT is too high (i.e.- if it's firing power-3 bullets at long distances). Like you said, 2.91 is 'fixed'. -- Kawigi
the result was reproducible so I posted the better one. I also moved the dotted line (100% means they have the same score...). Anyway how about a new MovementChallenge with the newest DT and Shadow (GF and PM). -- rozu
Great idea. Though I would include Raiko too since it's the strongest straight GF gun. -- PEZ
Sure, good idea. In this case we just need a Raiko in reference mode. -- rozu
Easy enough: http:/robocode/uploads/pez/jam.mini.RaikoMC_0.43.jar -- PEZ
Errr, wow! rozu you seriously need to work on targeting. :-) I get a CFC index around 65% and you're a fraction of a point above me, that's insane... Congrats! I really thought no-one would ever complete this challenge. -- Jamougha
thx. I'm not sure about the targeting here but you are probably right. If you don't mind I'll borrow Raikos gun for some tests to see where my work is needed. -- rozu
Feel free. If you can port the gun without breaking it at least. :-) It wasn't built with ease-of-use in mind. -- Jamougha
It's as easy as removing all movement from Raiko.java, stop subclassing AdvancedRobot and forward all the scanned robot event to this class. Also any robot method calls the gun needs to do must be delegated to the real robot. That's how I ported Aristocles gun to Marshmallow. Took about 5 minutes to get it to compile and work as well as it did in the original bot. -- PEZ
Is the challenger allowed to ram DT if it is disabled (this would influence the results alot)??? --deathcon
Well it's energy would be zero, so I guess you would get zero ram damage. And since you never fired, your ram bonus will be sero. So I'm not sure it would be too unbalancing... -- Jamougha
That might be true. But it is not allowed for the challenger to ram the reference bot. -- PEZ
Really? RaikoMX has a nast habit of ramming the opponent at the end of a round, though it's not intentional. I'll fix that the next time I do a CFC. -- Jamougha
Yep. The "addintional" conditions should state this. As you say it probably doesn't matter for your score. But any ramming code should be disabled. Ramming can contaminate an unprepared reference bots stats for instance. -- PEZ
But isn't that just good movement, contaminating the opponent's stats? :-) I guess it would happen more in a challenge than in a normal battle, though. -- Jamougha
Oh, yes, that's good movement. The traditional Marshmallow movement did lots of that stuff. It had methods like willLoose(), wilWin() and the like to decide when to start contaminating. I looked at the M movement code yesterday actually. It was a random movement but it tried to constrain it by never traveling beyond GF1 (or rather, when it thought it had reached GF1 it raised the probability for reverse). I thought it was ridiculous to even try and never appreciated that movement like I should have... And now WaveSurfing takes this ridiculous idea to its extreme and see what it can do! At least for the elite surfers. -- PEZ
Bloody brilliant that idea of "contamination"! Never thought ībout that... It can be very usefull. -- Axe
It's dangerous business though I think. Most good targeters are protected. Even micros like Aristocles checks for low power situations and doesn't update stats in that situation. -- PEZ
Hmmm. I obviously have started to get things working somewhat with WaveSurfing. Though it doesn't show for a bit in Pugilist performance. Must check my code for other bugs I guess... -- PEZ
Let me guess, "doesn't show for a bit" means "lower than a few other AM bots and higher than a few other AM bots" in this case? -- Kawigi
It means, lower ranked than P 1.3.1 which gets 17% in the challenge. I think I have some seriuos bug in P 1.4.2 that keeps its rating down. -- PEZ
I'd like to run this challenge for Toad but I can't find SandboxDT 1.91. Any idea where I can find it? --Florent
Targeting Challenge reference bots: http://robowiki.net/robocode/TCReferenceBots.zip . Cheers. --Corbos
Thanks, but the link is broken. --Florent
I'm not sure where I found it, but I threw it up on my web space for you for now... http://www.dijitari.com/void/robocode/pe.SandboxDT_1.91.jar -- Voidious
Thanks a lot, I'll run the challenge when my 1000 rounds APM challenge is finished (500 rounds took me an hour). --Florent
1 SandboxDT 1.91 35218 3900 780 28987 1550 0 0 79 421 0 2 Toad 25836 21050 4210 0 0 501 75 422 78 0index: 73,36% --Florent
I forgot to to disable the ramming at the end of the round in the previous results.
1 SandboxDT 1.91 36261 4100 820 29712 1629 0 0 89 411 0 2 Toad 24675 20550 4110 0 0 13 1 418 82 0index: 68,04% --Florent
As far as I know, that solves the SecurityException? bug. I thought DT didn't access files in reference mode, anyway? I dunno... In any case, I kinda consider this CFC obsolete since DT doesn't correctly process bullet times over 40. I get about 55% vs CC 1.9996bd, FYI :P -- Voidious
It didn't help putting that in the bat-file for roboleague. Probably DT still reads its datafile, but doesn't write it. The bullet time glitch in DT doesn't matter for CC since it doesn't exploit it. -- PEZ
I thought it was exploited any time a tank is more than 440 pixels away (40 ticks), which I'm pretty sure CC is a lot of the time in the MovementChallenge. Only some rounds make that possible, anyway. I've been using CassiusClay as my reference bot for CurveFlattening for several weeks, and only use DT to get the score to post here. -- Voidious
What I meant was that CC doesn't exploit it on purpose. Unlike Aleph. -- PEZ