= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Decius comments on Prisoner's dilemma tournament results - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (122)
When I first announced the tournament, people came up with many suggestions for modifications to the rules, most of which I did not take for the sake of simplicity. Maybe we should try to figure out what rules will make it easier to write more effective bots, even if that would disqualify many of the bots already submitted to this tournament.
I think that the bots already submitted should be considered for grandfathering if the rules change to prohibit them.
I also have a specific entry in mind, but lack the expertise to go from 'flowchart' to 'code'.
I think there would more people interested in playing if strategies could be submitted in pseudocode, so that would be great.
For entries that only eval(opponent(x)), for simple x, that seems reasonable. Strategies that rely on deeper analysis would need to look for specific things about the code that I, as a non-programmer, cannot describe accurately.
I would agree that they should compete even if they're not awarded prizes for winning. Because we should at least have a comparison with performance against old bots. More data is pretty much always better.
It should also be trivial to calculate the score both in this heat and against all previously submitted bots.