Poker-AI.org

Poker AI and Botting Discussion Forum
It is currently Sat Mar 28, 2020 8:35 am

All times are UTC




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 29 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2
Author Message
PostPosted: Fri Oct 17, 2014 9:13 am 
Offline
Junior Member

Joined: Wed Dec 04, 2013 12:40 am
Posts: 49
Nop, IR on the turn is indexing two groups of cards with cardinal 2 and 4. We still need to separate hole cards from board ;)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Oct 24, 2014 4:15 pm 
Offline
Veteran Member

Joined: Wed Mar 20, 2013 1:43 am
Posts: 259
Ok, I understand :)

When trying to load the library I get an unsatisfied link error, it say dependant libraries are missing :?:

Also does it run under both, Wnidows and Linux? Because I would need it on both systems.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 27, 2014 11:07 pm 
Offline
Junior Member

Joined: Wed Dec 04, 2013 12:40 am
Posts: 49
It does only work for windows x64 sorry. For the unsatisfied link error, you have to put the dll in the classpath.

Sacré d'Jeu said he did port the native code to Java (no JNI), and I asked him if he could publish the code but he didn't answer yet.
I'm a bit lazy and busy so I won't do it myself now, but still interested if anyone does :)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jul 26, 2015 12:35 pm 
Offline
Junior Member

Joined: Wed Dec 04, 2013 12:40 am
Posts: 49
After several month doing nothing about poker, I decided to code Waugh's indexer in Java.
I didn't look at the original code and just did what was written in the paper (omitting errors, understanding misleading notations and wrong examples :P ), then tried to optimize it.

Tested and working ! (to do a quite fast test, I implemented a full index/unindex test for 2-2 cards groups)

But I'm quite surprised with performance (of indexing because I didn't optimize unindexing).

I tried it for all flop permutations (311 875 200 indexing).

I modified the C test_full to skip the unindexing part and it took 572s => 545 236 indexings/s on a 2,2 Ghz i7

With my code, it took about 51s on a 2,3Ghz i7, so 6M indexings/s.

I'm not surprised of my code's perf but more by the C test of original code.

To compare, I tried indexing with Djhemlig's flop indexer and it gave me 12M indexings/s so my code is apparently twice slower.

So I'm wondering :
- why is the C code so slow ?
- how did Kevin Waugh observe such speed improvements over Hyperborean's implementation ? ("we also observed a 3.5x speed up of our indexing scheme over Hyperborean") I don't know the Hyperborean's implementation, is it that bad (or just old) ? And did he use its code with this bad execution speed to compare ?..


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 09, 2015 2:02 pm 
Offline
Veteran Member

Joined: Wed Mar 20, 2013 1:43 am
Posts: 259
Have you turned all optimisations on in your C compiler?

I also observed a speed improvement over djhelmig code, it mostly came from the fact, that you can index the streets incrementally, so when you index the river, you basically get the flop and turn for free. That makes a substantial difference in the CFRM algorithm, but maybe not in test cases.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 11, 2015 10:18 am 
Offline
Junior Member

Joined: Wed Dec 04, 2013 12:40 am
Posts: 49
Don't know about C compilation options, kind of a noob for that.
For CFRM you say that Waugh's indexer is faster than Djhemlig's one because of incremental indexing ?
I completely forgot about that in my Java implementation of Waugh's indexer, i'll look into it !


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Oct 16, 2015 2:14 am 
Offline
Veteran Member

Joined: Wed Mar 20, 2013 1:43 am
Posts: 259
Pitt wrote:
Don't know about C compilation options, kind of a noob for that.


For instance not using the -g flag, as this compile in the debug mode. Also enabling the optimisations, for instance with the -O2 flag.

I don't use gcc often, but O2 should be enough to be faster than java. Turning optimisations on really makes a big difference.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Oct 17, 2015 9:23 am 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 24, 2013 9:39 pm
Posts: 613
HontoNiBaka wrote:
How did you come up with those numbers? I have different numbers for imperfect hand indexing. Basically imperfect hand indexing on the turn let's say, would just be indexing of 6 cards, 1 round. My number is much smaller.


http://www.poker-ai.org/archive/www.pok ... a&start=60


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 14, 2017 5:09 pm 
Offline
Veteran Member

Joined: Wed Mar 20, 2013 1:43 am
Posts: 259
Can this code also be used for Omaha, if you only change the cards per street value, or do you think there could be some problems with that?

edit: ok I have read it again, it will be possible


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 29 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group