View source for User talk:Kev
Dude, welcome back! Good to see ya. =) A couple things made me think of you recently:
- We now have a Twin Duel division in the rumble.
- At long last, someone made a higher ranking all-DC duelist than Hydra: Diamond. =)
Hey Kev, nice to see an oldbie back. In addition to what Voidious listed, another recent happening is that there's been a bit of a ruckus in the melee scene with Diamond and Portia topping Shadow, and Glacier aspiring to push Shadow down to #4 in melee soon. Looking forward to seeing how WaveSerpent 2.0 goes :) --Rednaxela 18:48, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
Thanks, it's good to be back =). I'm amazed to see that Logic has been pushed down to fourteenth (with a few duplicate entries out there). I might look into melee later, but I'm pretty busy right now... -- Kev
|Thread title||Replies||Last modified|
|BeepBoop seems to be losing ~1.5 APS||4||02:02, 25 January 2023|
|BeepBoop seems to be the new king||14||06:17, 17 January 2023|
|Welcome back!||4||07:18, 21 May 2021|
Comparing to the nearly identical 1.20, you can clearly see some random drops, which I suspect to be skipped turns on some old hardware.
The previous results of APS ~94.8 can be reproduced on my computer, so I think the previous results can be trusted.
@Beaming seems to be contributing to RoboRumble the most recently, we could work together to see if something could be done to ensure reproducibility of RoboRumble.
I think I found a potential problem spot. One of my computers was 4 times slower and was using cpu constant from a 4 times faster computer. I recalculated cpu constant (by deleting the config file) and hope that the APS drop would resolve. It might explain why a better (subjectively) version of my bot in development performs worse than the old one.
It would be nice if rumble client recalculated CPU constant at the start. It take very little time and provides more stability. But I also recall discussion that active throttling in modern hardware makes this number just an estimate.
By the way in 2014 we had interesting discussion about Thread:User talk:Beaming/Smart bots competition allowing long calculation time for bots. Maybe it time to revive it since ML approaches developed quite a bit and they are CPU intensive.
From other hand making a top ranking fast bot is a challenge in itself.
I agree. Enforcing recomputing of CPU constant at the start and per e.g. 100 battles is necessary, as it highly affects results and is easy to get wrong. By recomputing periodically, it can also solve the problem of other heavy tasks that affects RoboRumble, without adding too much overhead.
I'm also thinking about adding some test set before allowing score submission, but that would be a long term plan.
I'll submit a PR for recomputing CPU constant, any suggestions are welcomed.
I'm also interested in adding a separate rumble with long calculation time.
I'll add an option to multiply cpu constant by a factor (warning, advanced usage) from rumble config file, then *SmartRumble* could be realized. The initial participants could be copied from GigaRumble ;)
I bought a low-end PC running Linux with 4 cores @ 1.33Ghz (cpu in 2016), and turbo-boost disabled. The cpu constant is 5x more than my master computer.
I tried to run the entire rumble with roborunner, two instances in parallel, (which takes ~20x time to complete, since I run 8 instances normally), and by far the scores look fine. So I guess what actually causes strange scores is indeed using inaccurate cpu constants.
Anyway, I haven't tried running other background tasks at the same time (because I don't have such tasks to run), so I'm not sure whether that affects the score as well.
Congratulation! BeebBoop is at the very top.
Do you mind to hint about new top of the line research direction?
Congratulations (again) from me too ;) BeepBoop since 1.2 had very surprising results (nearly 95!!!). And yet nothing worked when I tried to use gradient descent in training models. Would you mind to share a little bit more about this section? E.g. initialization, learning rate, how to prevent getting zero or negative exponent in x^a formula…
I’ve been meaning to release the code for the training, but it’s currently a huge mess and I’m pretty busy! In the meantime, here are some details that might help:
- I initialized the powers to 1, biases to 0, and multipliers to a simple hand-made KNN formula.
- I constrained the powers to be positive, so I guess the formula should really be written as w(x+b)^abs(a).
- I used Adam with a learning rate 1e-3 for optimization.
- Changing the KNN formula of course changes the nearest neighbors, so I alternated between training for a couple thousand steps and rebuilding the tree and making new examples.
- For simplicity/efficiency, I used binning to build a histogram over GFs for an observation. Simply normalizing the histogram so it sums to 1 to get an output distribution doesn’t work that well (for one thing, it can produce very low probabilities if the kernel width is small). Instead, I used the output distribution softmax(t * log(histogram + abs(b))) where t and b are learned parameters initialized to 1 and 1e-4.
Thanks! My guess for the next innovation that could improve bots is active bullet shadowing. Instead of always shooting at the angle your aiming model gives as most likely to hit, it is probably better to sometimes shoot at an angle that is less likely to hit if it creates helpful bullet shadows for you. This idea would especially help against strong surfers whose movements have really flat profiles (so there isn’t much benefit from aiming precisely). I never got around to implementing it, so it remains to be seen if it actually is useful!
Thanks for insights and ideas. Bullet shielder temped me a while ago. I thought that if one cat intercept a bullet wave close to the launch point, a bullet shadow will be big enough to slide in. But that required good knowledge of when a bullet will be fired. I guess it can be done similar to how its done in DrussGT which has a tree to predict the opponent bullet segmented on energy and distance. (At least I remember reading in wiki about some one way to predict an enemy wave this way). But my attempts to do it were not very successful.
By the way, could you repackage your bot with an older Java version? I am running the rumble but it fails on your bot complaining about
Can't load 'kc.mega.BeepBoop 1.21' because it is an invalid robot or team.
I think the current agreement that Java JDK v11 or lower is accepted. If you look at rumble stats, you would see that your bot has less battles then many others.
I think RoboRumble should be inclusive, which means the client should be run with the latest LTS version of Java to allow more Java versions to participate. LTS versions are also meant to be more stable, which help with more stable results.
I also updated the guide to suggest Java 17, which is the latest LTS version for now, instead of Java 11. Would you mind upgrading the Java version of your client?
Sure. I am upgrading my clients to Java 17. Seems to be ok, except the warning about depreciated calls to
WARNING: System::setSecurityManager has been called by net.sf.robocode.host.security.RobocodeSecurityManager (file:/home/evmik/misc/robocode-184.108.40.206/libs/robocode.host-220.127.116.11.jar) WARNING: Please consider reporting this to the maintainers of net.sf.robocode.host.security.RobocodeSecurityManager WARNING: System::setSecurityManager will be removed in a future release
I think it is addressed in the newer robocode versions, but rumble still accept only 18.104.22.168
It is never addressed. Also, there's currently no solution after Java removes SecurityManager, other than sticking to Java 17 (or newer LTS versions still with SecurityManager). Tank Royale could be the long-term plan, but it is only possible after some cross-platform sandbox solution having been implemented.
Btw, BeepBoop seems to be losing APS due to inconsistency in RoboRumble client (e.g. skipped turns).
BeepBoop runs fine on my computer, with the same result as (previous) RoboRumble and without skipped turns. Could you share some information about your environment, e.g. clients running in parallel, dedicated (not running any other task) or not. This may heavily affect reproducibility of RoboRumble.
It has been 9 years(!) since my first touching of robocode and I couldn’t remember when was my last attempt to recreate a competitive mega bot!
any way looking forward to a new challenger to all categories of rumbles!
Thank you! I guess the robocode scene is quieter than it used to be, but it's nice to see many new strong bots in the rumble since I last checked!
You do not have permission to edit this page, for the following reasons:
- The action you have requested is limited to users in the group: Users.
- You must confirm your email address before editing pages. Please set and validate your email address through your user preferences.
You can view and copy the source of this page.GrubbmGait (talk)
Return to Thread:User talk:Kev/Welcome back!/reply (2).