Quote:
. For HU limit Texas Hold'em the current strongest agent is from academia -- the University of Alberta just "essentially solved" it to exploitability of 1 mbb/hand and would beat anyone.
Well, I am not sure if they would beat anyone but yeah, their solution is very good and won't be easy to replicate.
On the other hand they calculated it for 70 days on 4800 cores... while it's impressive they got the distributed code right it doesn't sound very impressive considering the amount of resources were spent. I mean... there is not much to compare because normal people don't have access to supercomputers and the guys who won limit competitions so far (Cepheus didn't compete yet I think) did it having way smaller hardware and they claim they solved it without approximation as well (although I have no idea if they are right about it). If they did it's safe to assume they are ahead of the curve on this one.
Quote:
There are some limitations in academia
I understand it.There is value in developing more general approach which is used to poker than focusing just on poker. I am just saying that the fact that you are the best academic team doesn't mean you have much of automatic authority here.
It seems to me you guys made some design decisions which are just very counter-productive to developing a strong playing entity.
I am a bit jaded because there was a discussion about Tartanian before and I had the impression the author doesn't understand much about poker (although I am sure he understands a lot about math/programming in general) then there are claims that Claudico is some top AI or what not while it's clear to everyone it's blundering left and right and taking 30 seconds to recalculate river on 64 cores. It should be easy to make some claims about exploitability as well (at least for flop exploitability or w/e) and those are nowhere to be seen while the author is claiming people can learn a lot from the bot. Where you claim stuff that you have this amazing thing and people can learn a lot of from it then provide the number quantifying how good it is. It's not a rocket science to calculate it or at least approximate it well.
If it's 25bb/100 from NE then we know it's decent but far away from being close to the solution. If it's 50bb/100 we know it's just not good at all (even if it's stronger than other publicly available stuff).