Commit Graph
7 Commits
Author SHA1 Message Date
coolguyandClaude Opus 4.7 004b913a7b Rename bot family, curate analyze plots, tier evaluation cadence
Three coordinated hygiene changes; none target the diagnosed
selection-bias bottleneck. They make the codebase honestly reflect the
pure-self-play stance and reduce dashboard noise.

Bot rename (drop the unhelpful safe_ prefix; suffixes describe behaviour):
- safe_heuristic_loose -> heuristic_aggressive
- safe_heuristic       -> heuristic_balanced
- safe_heuristic_strict -> heuristic_cautious
- noisy_safe           -> heuristic_noisy
- passive_discard      -> discard_only

Class renames in bots/: SafeHeuristicBot -> HeuristicBot,
SafeHeuristicParams -> HeuristicParams, PassiveDiscardBot -> DiscardOnlyBot,
plus loose/strict parameter constants. Backwards compatibility was dropped
intentionally per user instruction; no aliases. Active configs, docs,
scripts, tests updated. Archive directories (configs/archive,
docs/archive, runs/archive) left intact and may still reference old
names per their read-only policy. The src/.../bots/passive.py module was
renamed to discard_only.py via git mv.

Analyze plot curation (deep_cfr/analyze.py):
- Added analysis_00_core.png as the canonical daily dashboard with 10
  heuristic-free metrics (loss/{advantage,strategy}; vs heuristic_cautious:
  avg_score_diff0, win_rate0, avg_opened_colors, positive_expedition_rate,
  bonus_expedition_rate, score_per_opened_color, policy_entropy; vs random:
  win_rate0).
- Removed analysis_05_open_quality.png (bad/weak/good open rates,
  recoverable score) and analysis_07_calibration.png (calibration gap,
  recoverable mean) - both relied on the heuristic recoverable_score
  classifier already dropped from inputs.
- Removed SELECTIVITY_PLOTS and plot_selectivity (heuristic-laden).
- SUMMARY_EVAL_METRICS no longer includes bad_open_rate or
  calibration_gap.
- PlotSpec gained an opponents allowlist so the new core section can pin
  a specific opponent per panel without restructuring plot_section.

Tiered evaluation cadence (EvaluationConfig):
- Added extended_opponents and extended_eval_every (default 0 = disabled).
- opponents_for_iteration(iteration) returns the core list every
  eval_every and appends extended_opponents (de-duplicated) when
  iteration is also a multiple of extended_eval_every.
- default.yaml now uses 3 core opponents (random, discard_only,
  heuristic_cautious) every 5 iterations and 3 extended opponents
  (heuristic_balanced, heuristic_aggressive, heuristic_noisy) every 50
  iterations. random is the floor sanity. discard_only is the
  zero-pit detector / absolute-score reference (its score is always 0,
  so eval/discard_only/avg_score_diff0 directly equals the model's raw
  average score). heuristic_cautious is the ceiling and the
  archive-comparable benchmark used in the prior diagnostic sections.

Net eval cost reduction: roughly 50% (3 opponents x every 5 iter, plus
6 opponents x every 50 iter, vs the prior 6 x every 5).

Documented in docs/plans/deep-cfr-selectivity.md section 9.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-05-10 15:32:55 +09:00
coolguyandCodex 7c20d53103 Measure traversal policy boundary cost
Add a microbench that separates game/encoding overhead, single-request policy boundary overhead, and batched PyTorch forward lower bounds. Record CPU/CUDA results and link the finding from the Julia port evaluation.

Co-Authored-By: Codex <codex@openai.com>
2026-05-07 22:02:46 +09:00
coolguyandCodex 847cc84c9f try torch jl mlp criterion retry
Co-Authored-By: Codex <codex@openai.com>
2026-05-07 21:36:21 +09:00
coolguyandCodex fea8e5b9de measure julia flux mlp forward criterion
Co-Authored-By: Codex <codex@openai.com>
2026-05-07 21:27:34 +09:00
coolguyandClaude Opus 4.7 14dbf9c804 Add explicit pass/fail thresholds for Julia port criteria
Decision-in-advance for criteria 3 (multi-thread scaling), 4 (Flux/CUDA
MLP forward), and 5 (real-game-state slice). Each criterion lists PASS
/ PARTIAL / FAIL bands with concrete numerical thresholds, plus a
decision rule that maps {3, 4, 5} outcomes to a single action: port,
hybrid (Julia traversal + PyTorch networks), or stay on Python/Cython
and pursue Option B instead.

Cost-of-being-wrong asymmetry stated explicitly: port is months,
staying is zero work, so the GO bar is deliberately above 50% and the
STAY bar is permissive.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-05-07 21:12:10 +09:00
coolguyandCodex 100f498cf1 add heavy julia cfr thread scaling
Co-Authored-By: Codex <codex@openai.com>
2026-05-07 21:08:35 +09:00
coolguyandClaude Opus 4.7 ce9c6f6b93 Add Julia CFR-shape toy benchmark + Julia port evaluation thread
experiments/julia_cfr_toy/ ports a synthetic CFR external-sampling
traversal to both Julia and Cython for direct head-to-head
measurement of the actual project hot-path pattern (recursive
tree + mutable regret state + branch-heavy legal-action logic).

Headline result (2026-05-07, single run): Julia ~1.9× faster than
Cython on this pattern, 0 MB allocation, 0% GC time. Root regret
parity ε ≤ 1e-9. The GC-pause concern that was the main argument
against Julia adoption did not materialize. Cython's 21.3 MB
allocation suggests its implementation can be tightened, so the
honest gap window is roughly 1.3×–1.9×.

Multi-thread scaling (bench_cfr_threaded.jl): 2.44× wall-clock at 8T
but only 31% efficiency — inconclusive, likely a toy-size artifact
(per-thread workload too small to amortize dispatch). A heavier
per-thread workload sweep is the remaining decisive test.

docs/research/julia_port_evaluation.md captures this evidence
alongside the earlier safe-heuristic single-thread parity result
and lists the remaining decision criteria (multi-thread scaling with
heavier workload, Flux.jl+CUDA.jl coverage, real-game-state slice).
Do not commit to porting until multi-thread scaling is conclusively
settled.

ideas.md gets a second Active Research Threads pointer.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-05-07 21:04:15 +09:00