Rocksolid Light

Welcome to novaBBS (click a section below)

mail  files  register  newsreader  groups  login

Message-ID:  

Department chairmen never die, they just lose their faculties.


interests / rec.games.backgammon / What do we do when Axel's Isight method is ambiguous?

SubjectAuthor
o What do we do when Axel's Isight method is ambiguous?peps...@gmail.com

1
What do we do when Axel's Isight method is ambiguous?

<a26542b0-8142-41ab-aadb-0db5ac7d318an@googlegroups.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/interests/article-flat.php?id=8561&group=rec.games.backgammon#8561

 copy link   Newsgroups: rec.games.backgammon
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6214:621:b0:432:5e0d:cb64 with SMTP id a1-20020a056214062100b004325e0dcb64mr7836640qvx.65.1650285213857;
Mon, 18 Apr 2022 05:33:33 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6870:f724:b0:e2:c64c:e2e8 with SMTP id
ej36-20020a056870f72400b000e2c64ce2e8mr5908723oab.134.1650285213625; Mon, 18
Apr 2022 05:33:33 -0700 (PDT)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!border1.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: rec.games.backgammon
Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2022 05:33:33 -0700 (PDT)
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=217.155.59.144; posting-account=X1j9wgoAAADLt4UnZrIneT3jwl9HvLMd
NNTP-Posting-Host: 217.155.59.144
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <a26542b0-8142-41ab-aadb-0db5ac7d318an@googlegroups.com>
Subject: What do we do when Axel's Isight method is ambiguous?
From: pepste...@gmail.com (peps...@gmail.com)
Injection-Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2022 12:33:33 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Lines: 19
 by: peps...@gmail.com - Mon, 18 Apr 2022 12:33 UTC

I have just read (not particularly thoroughly, admittedly)
Axel's Isight paper. It's simply than I thought, and I look forward
to applying it in practice.

However, the method is (occasionally) not well-defined in my opinion.
But the same lack of definedness is apparent in all methods that I know of.
Suppose that a player A (for Alice) has all of her checkers in a single acepoint stack.
Let n be the height of the stack.
Mathematically, this is exactly the same position as if n was replaced by
m = 2 * ceiling(n/2). Yet m and n might well be different.
So which do we use? m or n. Clearly the answer can sometimes matter.
Applying the method literally, the current method is just to use m or n
according to how the position is presented on the board. But that
clearly makes no sense whatsoever.
Without further clarification, my gut instincts would be to use m rather than
n since those tend the even stacks tend to be the most common mental
picture when players are creating the analysis. But I'm really not sure.
Any thoughts? Thank you.

Paul

1
server_pubkey.txt

rocksolid light 0.9.7
clearnet tor