Hacktoberfest 2026: le issue che i maintainer hanno segnato per ottobre, aperte e adatte ai principianti. Sfoglia le issue Hacktoberfest

[Question] About 2048 scoring

Aperta
  • Qualcosa non va?
#394 3 commenti 0 reazioni 0 assegnatari Vedi su GitHub

I maintainer di solito rispondono entro 3 giorni

Nessuno ha ancora preso questa issue.

Valutazione

Difficoltà
4/5
Tempo stimato
3-5 giorni
Idoneità per principianti
25/100
Tipo di issue
Bug
Chiarezza
Da chiarire
Stato di attività
Ferma
Stack tecnologico
python
Ambito
ai, machine-learning

Direzione di ricerca

Inizia da examples/2048 e riproduci l’esecuzione usando qwen3-30b-a3b-thinking-2507 e SIMULTANEOUS_GAMES = 9. Esamina l’eccezione ignorata e i casi che producono {'scores': []}, quindi determina se il comportamento è previsto oppure individua una correzione riproducibile; il lavoro è completato quando sono stati stabiliti la causa e il comportamento previsto del punteggio.

Scritto dal modello di indicizzazione a partire dal testo della issue.

Descrizione

question

I try 2048 example and only one scores in the end (step 27), other is always {'scores': []}

[RULER] Pretty-printed LLM choice JSON:
{'scores': []}
 Swallowed exception: 
Skipping tuning as there is no suitable data. This can happen when all the trajectories in the same group have the same reward and thus no advantage to train on.
Advanced step from 25 to 26 (no training occurred)
gather: 100%|███████████| 9/9 [00:34<00:00,  3.80s/it, reward=1.17, invalid_move=0.111, max_value=71.3, board_value=159, num_moves=71, win=0.333, prompt_tokens=2.04e+3, completion_tokens=21.3, total_completion_tokens=5240.0]

[RULER] Pretty-printed LLM choice JSON:
{'scores': []}
 Swallowed exception: 
Skipping tuning as there is no suitable data. This can happen when all the trajectories in the same group have the same reward and thus no advantage to train on.
Advanced step from 26 to 27 (no training occurred)
gather: 100%|█████████| 9/9 [00:39<00:00,  4.40s/it, reward=1.49, invalid_move=0.111, max_value=93.6, board_value=162, num_moves=72.3, win=0.667, prompt_tokens=2.21e+3, completion_tokens=21.3, total_completion_tokens=5336.0]

[RULER] Pretty-printed LLM choice JSON:
{
    'scores': [
        {
            'trajectory_id': '1',
            'explanation': "This trajectory starts with a very basic board state (2, 2 at top) and makes only one move 'up'. It doesn't achieve the goal of reaching 2048, but shows early progress toward organizing cells. It 
gets partial credit for making a move that could potentially lead to combining cells.",
            'score': 0.1
        },
        {
            'trajectory_id': '2',
            'explanation': 'This trajectory demonstrates excellent 2048 gameplay, reaching high values including a 32 and continuing to build up the board efficiently. It makes strategic moves without getting stuck and 
progresses toward 2048 successfully.',
            'score': 0.95
        },
        {
            'trajectory_id': '3',
            'explanation': 'This trajectory also performs very well, reaching high tile values and successfully building up the board. It shows strong strategic play with consistent progress toward 2048.',
            'score': 0.9
        },
        {
            'trajectory_id': '4',
            'explanation': 'This trajectory shows good 2048 playing, reaching tile values up to 32. It makes strategic moves but has some inefficient patterns that could be improved, though still performs well overall.',
            'score': 0.8
        },
        {
            'trajectory_id': '5',
            'explanation': 'This trajectory reaches tile values up to 32. It is very strategic and shows good board organization, but has some inefficient moves compared to trajectory 2 or 3.',
            'score': 0.85
        },
        {
            'trajectory_id': '6',
            'explanation': 'This trajectory also shows good 2048 playing, reaching tiles up to 32. While it progresses well and shows planning ahead, it has some suboptimal moves that make it less efficient than the top 
performers.',
            'score': 0.8
        },
        {
            'trajectory_id': '7',
            'explanation': 'This trajectory makes good progress toward 2048, reaching high tile values. However, its movements are less consistently efficient compared to top trajectories in terms of combining cells 
effectively.',
            'score': 0.75
        },
        {
            'trajectory_id': '8',
            'explanation': "This trajectory reaches high tiles but shows some inefficiencies in its approach. It makes moves that don't always leverage existing cell combinations effectively.",
            'score': 0.7
        },
        {
            'trajectory_id': '9',
            'explanation': 'This trajectory shows moderate progress, reaching some high tiles but with several inefficient moves that prevent it from performing as well as the top trajectories.',
            'score': 0.65
        }
    ]
}

Only the change I made is I use local qwen3-30b-a3b-thinking-2507 and SIMULTANEOUS_GAMES = 9.
Just curious btw. 😗

Lingua principale
Python
Stelle
10.8k
Fork
989
Merge medio
11h 38m
PR unite (30g)
104

Preparare l'ambiente

Come iniziare

  1. Leggi tutta la issue e poi la guida ai contributi del progetto.
  2. Commenta sulla issue per dire che te ne occupi tu — evita che due persone facciano lo stesso lavoro.
  3. Fai un fork del repository e lavora su un branch.
  4. Apri una pull request che faccia riferimento al numero della issue.

Altre issue di OpenPipe/ART

Tutte le issue di OpenPipe/ART

Issue simili

Altre issue su Python

Ricevi le nuove issue nella tua casella

Un breve riepilogo di issue GitHub adatte ai principianti.