New bot in the works: TutorBot

[Chris]

Hi all,

as mentioned in another Thread I am developing a new bot, TutorBot
I won't be a playing bot, but a watching bot.

The idea is to add discussions about the best possible move an instantly opinion from gnubg.
Whenever one of the both players makes a doubtful/bad/very bad move, the bot kibitzes this and the best move. It can handle both unlimited matches (money play) and rated matches.

It is work in progress, still some bugs (sometimes it misinterprets the board and wants to move pieces from positions with no pieces at all ...) but if you are interested in just ask me and I will give  a demonstration about the actual state of affairs.

Some technical details: Programming language is Java 1.5, the artificial intelligence is gnubg.
Gnubg also runs the playing bots ParlorBot, NiceRollerBot and the mgnu-bots. Strength will be expert (0 ply).

[adamosad]

Very good job Chris!!!  It was nice to see it in action during its testing period!!!

Gnubg also runs the playing bots ParlorBot, NiceRollerBot and the mgnu-bots

Just to improve my knowledge.... what about bonehead and donzbot?

[jonesyjt]

I certainly hope both players have to agree to tutorbot being used beforehand.  And I may have a problem with this type of play having an effect on ratings.  

[adamosad]

Hi jonesyjt,

Why do u have a problem? The bot looks at every move and tells the mistakes after you or your opponent do them. So as long as the bot does not kibitz anything about cube decisions the result would be the same with or without the bot. So I can not see any reason in order to gag it or blind it.

[Chris]

Yes jonesyjt, both players should agree using this bot, but beforehand will be too complicated I guess.
I understand that there are some reasons why someone might dislike the bot and won't use it. But of course the use of this bot is absolutely voluntary, you can't be forced to use it.
If you don't like it - "blind TutorBot".

Adamosad, the bot indeed might change the way of playing. Imagine you have to decide - running or staying in the opponent's homeboard. You decide to stay and the bot says "run". What will you do the next time?
So playing with this bot watching might be different from "normal" play. But both players have the same benefit, I don't see there a problem if both agree to use it.
Even if I would implement judges about cube actions like "very bad - you should have doubled!" in the future - it will be for both players. So I don't see there a way of cheating.

About ratings: Well, weak players will probably have a bigger benefit than strong players, cause the bot will rarely kibitz something about the strong player's moves. But as I said before - you are free to do what you want, if you don't like it, don't use it.
Oh, and a feature not yet implemented but to come soon: You are not allowed to use this tool while playing against bots - they have no benefit and are not able to resist.

[Chris]

Ok, I removed the annoying bug. The bot still is alpha software but stable and good enough to give it a try.

There are the following commands: (with "tell TutorBot"):

- "watch me"
If the bot is free and don't watch another player, then now it belong to you.

- "unwatch"
If you are tired of the bot, with "unwatch" you can get rid of it.

To make it clear: The bot will not only comment the moves of the player it watches but of the opponent as well!

You all are welcome to use it!

[diane]

EEK - while I understand this bot was developed with the best of intentions - I cannot help but feel this is a cheating tool!! I now have to check if my opponent is being watched and helped by a bot???  

I think it is a great  idea if agreed with both parties before starting a match - but I need it to kibitz its presence at the start of any match to make me feel comfortable - and still think its best application is as a 'one on one' teaching aid - the player chooses to play it - and is advised of good/bad moves and encouraged to play better that way.  If it could incorporate some 'why' into 'this is the best move' - it would stand head and shoulders above any other bot available for this purpose.

[amarganth]

I've played against Chris, two days ago. TutorBot was watching.

The bot cannot be used for cheating, because the bot will tell you *after* your move, it was a "doubtful"/"bad"/.. move. But the move was made.

I find it a very good idea, because most of us, i think, are sometimes in doubt, what the best move is. The bot helps in such situations to learn something for future games. And it helps both players.

Currently, the bot cannot analyze doubling, only moves (Correct me, if I'm wrong, Chris). We discussed the influence of a missed double for instance for the doubling decision in the next move of that player.

If only one of the players doesn't like this TutorBot, he/she can "blind TutorBot". That's all. The other player cannot do anything against that, because the TutorBot doesn't get any boards for analyzing after that.

It's a great idea, Chris. Good work!  

[Chris]

Ok, though not sharing your reservations I have to accept them.

So,

1. The bot won't play in the wild without me beeing online and taking care of it until it is more mature.

2. I will implement a whitelist / opt-in system, which means, before you are able to use it the first time (that will apply for your opponent as well!) you have to sign up to the bot. The sign up has to be done only once, the bot will remember.
So if you never signed up, the bot will never interfere with your matches.
A possibility for sign-offs will be there too, of course.

Regards, Chris

[Tomawaky]

Great idea , and can be usefull for people who want to use it.
Personnaly I prefer playing without being disturb and do the analyse later if necessary.
Or playing vs GNU in tutor mode, but not online with another player

But I will certainly try it once or two ;-)
and it's always a good news to hear about people trying to improve and always add  some new features here.

thanks Chris

[webrunner]

I second that Tomawaky    

[jonesyjt]

I apologize Chris.

I did not understand that hints would come after play.  This is of course very different.
I retract my prior concerns.  

jonesyjt