Re: [Bug-gnubg] Wrong cube errors categories in analysis statistics panel

[Holger]

At 02:09 01.10.2003, Jim Segrave wrote:

> > Does someone know why getMatchPoints() does this and whether this is
> > intended?
>
> I can't reproduce this.

Here is an example:
Attached is a game with one wrong double and a missed double. To reproduce: 
run gnubg in gdb, set a breakpoint just after line 311 (the call to 
getMatchPoints), load the attached game, and invoke Analyse/Session statistics.
Here this gives for the wrong double (the first decision):

(gdb) p aaarPointsMatch
$2 = {{{0.26412797, 0.225260854}, {0.49239853, 0.49239853},
       {0.720825553, 0.785499096}, {0.969819069, 0.785499096}},
      {{0.279174447, 0.214500904}, {0.507601678, 0.507601678},
       {0.73587203, 0.774739146}, {0.984015822, 0.774739146}}}

Analyse/Market window (GUI version) with the wrong double selected gives:
Market window for player pl0
    Dead cube Fully live
TP   26.413%   21.450%
DP   49.240%   49.240%
CP   72.083%   77.474%
TG   96.982%   77.474%

Market window for player pl1
    Dead cube Fully live
TP   27.917%   22.526%
DP   50.760%   50.760%
CP   73.587%   78.550%
TG   98.402%   78.550%

> > To categorize cubes gnubg compares the arithmetic means of DP and
> > CP, and CP and TG with the winning probabilities.  Could someone
> > please explain me why (and confirm that) this is correct?
>
> See above, I think it is correct.
>
> > I'm wondering about the following: The winning probability
> > (aarOutput[ 0 ][ OUTPUT_WIN ]) doesn't include any added value for
> > gammon or bg chances (aarOutput[ 0 ][ OUTPUT_WINGAMMON ] and
> > aarOutput[ 0 ][ OUTPUT_WINBACKGAMMON ]). Those match points (DP, CP,
> > TG) have an entity of cubeful equity, don't they? And I think
> > equities are calculated as the sum of winning chances, gammon
> > chances and bg chances, thus include gammon and bg value. If all
> > this was correct so far, then I suppose these 2 values can't be
> > compared.
>
> This seems a good point - I think picking the point needs to be done
> in terms of MWC, it's not enough to do equity, since in some match
> points, gammons are irre;evant.

Ok, I'll compare them with an entity of MWC. But I think this doesn't solve 
the problem (if my conclusions were correct) that the winning probability 
doesn't account for gammon and bg values in games where they matter. 
eq2mwc() gives a MWC, but the winning probability is no equity, is it?

Regards,

        Holger

DoubleStats.zip
Description: Zip archive