coolguyandClaude Opus 4.7
ce9c6f6b93
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>
4 lines
33 B
Plaintext
4 lines
33 B
Plaintext
bench_cfr.c
|
|
bench_cfr*.so
|
|
build/
|