Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

AlphaGo beats the world champion Lee Sedol in first of five matches

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

421–430 of 596 posts

Re: AlphaGo beats the world champion Lee Sedol in first of five matches

#421

Post by uremog »

hosh wrote: post #392
hosh wrote: post #370

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The 2003 match was a brute force approach. AlphaGo's architecture resembles much closer to how humans think and learn. I initially learned Go to be able to have some chance of an AI. I then had some transformative experiences that coincided with my early kyu learning of basic Go lessons. On of the big lessons in Go is to learn how to let go of something. Taking solace in anything on the Go board is one of the blocks…

And just to emphasize the big point here: The AlphaGo that beat the 2p European champion five months ago was not as strong as the AlphaGo that beat Lee Sedol (9p). I don't think this was just the AlphaGo team throwing more hardware. I think they had been constantly running the self-training during the intervening months so that AlphaGo was improving itself. If that is so, then the big thing here isn't that AlphaGo is…

That could be true, but according to some articles I was reading at the time (sorry no src), the nature of their engine is that you cannot determine just how strong it is by playing one game because it plays to "just win", and not to win by as much as possible (paraphrase). So maybe it was barely good enough to be 2p, maybe it was already much stronger.

Re: AlphaGo beats the world champion Lee Sedol in first of five matches

#422

Post by d0mine »

sethbannon wrote: post #7

I was at the 2003 match of Garry Kasparov vs Deep Junior -- the strongest chess player of all time vs what was at that point the strongest chess playing computer in history. Kasparov drew that match, but it was clear it was the last stand of homo sapiens in the man vs machine chess battle. Back then, people took solace in the game of Go. Many boldly and confidently predicted we wouldn't see a computer beat the Go wor…

Francis Collins? said something like: people underestimate the change in the short term and overestimate it in the long term (there is my flying DeLorean and the hotel on the Moon).

Re: AlphaGo beats the world champion Lee Sedol in first of five matches

#423

Post by SilasX »

aab0 wrote: post #315
ragebol wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But the computer certainly does not win on the amount of training samples required. The human is at the same level as the computer now for Go, but the computer has had much more training samples as Lee Sedol could process in his lifetime. The next step is to reduce the training time/samples for the computer to get the same performance.

> but the computer has had much more training samples as Lee Sedol could process in his lifetime. That's not obvious at all. I don't think you appreciate how rigorous and demanding the training of a Go world champion is, how utterly devoted to Go they need to be: http://lesswrong.com/lw/n8b/link_alphago_mastering_the_ancie...

That's a good point, but it's still orders of magnitude below what a human -- even a devoted one -- could ever review.

Of course, there are many ways you can do the comparison:

Time to build: The AlphaGo team didn't have billions of years of evolutionary tinkering to work with in refining biological heuristic/learning systems.

Hardware limits: though still more efficient at search than previous designs, AlphaGo still has a lot more storage space and inter-component bandwidth than a human brain, plus better latency. Will the algorithms improve to the point that they can perform well on an extremely restricted architecture?

Re: AlphaGo beats the world champion Lee Sedol in first of five matches

#424

Post by dingo_bat »

Confusion wrote: post #139
esturk wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've never felt playing against what is suppose to be an entire room of machines (wether Deep Blue or Watson) to be fair. What would be fair is to limit the total mass of the computer to say 200kg and leave it at that. What is effectively happening is AlphaGo is running on a distributed system of many, many machines. Even Watson took an entire room. Google is paying a premium to push AlphaGo to win.

Chess engines and processing power have since then advanced to a point where my phone can now reliably beat Carlsen. There is no reason to suppose Go is different in that respect. In 10 years, DeepMind will fit into a phone.

>my phone can now reliably beat Carlsen

I've seen this written by many people but is there any solid evidence/study that proves this?

Edit: seems like Pocket Fritz and Komodo are easily able to beat grandmasters.

Re: AlphaGo beats the world champion Lee Sedol in first of five matches

#425

Post by Florin_Andrei »

hosh wrote: post #392
hosh wrote: post #370

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The 2003 match was a brute force approach. AlphaGo's architecture resembles much closer to how humans think and learn. I initially learned Go to be able to have some chance of an AI. I then had some transformative experiences that coincided with my early kyu learning of basic Go lessons. On of the big lessons in Go is to learn how to let go of something. Taking solace in anything on the Go board is one of the blocks…

And just to emphasize the big point here: The AlphaGo that beat the 2p European champion five months ago was not as strong as the AlphaGo that beat Lee Sedol (9p). I don't think this was just the AlphaGo team throwing more hardware. I think they had been constantly running the self-training during the intervening months so that AlphaGo was improving itself. If that is so, then the big thing here isn't that AlphaGo is…

Correct. It played like a top level human player, pretty evenly matched with Lee Sedol. AlphaGo from yesterday would have wiped the floor with AlphaGo from 6 months ago.

Various commentators mentioned how both players, human and synthetic, made a few mistakes. Even I caught a slow move made by the AI. So whether Lee Sedol was at the top of his peformance, or not, is a bit of a debate. But the AI was clearly on the same level, whatever that means.

It was an intense fight throughout the game, with both players making bold moves and taking risks. Fantastic show.

Re: AlphaGo beats the world champion Lee Sedol in first of five matches

#426

Post by Florin_Andrei »

uremog wrote: post #421
hosh wrote: post #392

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And just to emphasize the big point here: The AlphaGo that beat the 2p European champion five months ago was not as strong as the AlphaGo that beat Lee Sedol (9p). I don't think this was just the AlphaGo team throwing more hardware. I think they had been constantly running the self-training during the intervening months so that AlphaGo was improving itself. If that is so, then the big thing here isn't that AlphaGo is…

That could be true, but according to some articles I was reading at the time (sorry no src), the nature of their engine is that you cannot determine just how strong it is by playing one game because it plays to "just win", and not to win by as much as possible (paraphrase). So maybe it was barely good enough to be 2p, maybe it was already much stronger.

6 months ago it was clearly stronger than Fan Hui 2p. You don't beat someone at that level 5-0 without being consistently stronger.

Fan Hui said the machine played extremely consistently 6 months ago. He said playing the computer was "like pushing against a wall" - just very strong, very consistent performance.

Re: AlphaGo beats the world champion Lee Sedol in first of five matches

#427

Post by adenadel »

d0mine wrote: post #422
sethbannon wrote: post #7

I was at the 2003 match of Garry Kasparov vs Deep Junior -- the strongest chess player of all time vs what was at that point the strongest chess playing computer in history. Kasparov drew that match, but it was clear it was the last stand of homo sapiens in the man vs machine chess battle. Back then, people took solace in the game of Go. Many boldly and confidently predicted we wouldn't see a computer beat the Go wor…

Francis Collins? said something like: people underestimate the change in the short term and overestimate it in the long term (there is my flying DeLorean and the hotel on the Moon).

I think you got it backwards. Bill Gates said

"We always overestimate the change that will occur in the next two years and underestimate the change that will occur in the next ten. Don't let yourself be lulled into inaction."

Re: AlphaGo beats the world champion Lee Sedol in first of five matches

#428

Post by soup10 »

Florin_Andrei wrote: post #418
areyousure wrote: post #393

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Many boldly and confidently predicted we wouldn't see a computer beat the Go world champion in our lifetimes. Can anyone provide some written references to this effect? Last time I searched (extensively), I couldn't really find anyone saying this.

FWIW, before AlphaGo defeated Fan Hui 2-dan last year, everyone was saying that would not be possible before 2025 or so. That was the consensus.

People that try to predict the future in ai are breathing hot air more often then not.

Re: AlphaGo beats the world champion Lee Sedol in first of five matches

#430

Post by Florin_Andrei »

bduerst wrote: post #397
geebee wrote: post #387

Terrific accomplishment. Just a question to throw out there - does anyone feel like statements like this one "But the game [go] is far more complex than chess, and playing it requires a high level of feeling and intuition about an opponent’s next moves." … seem to show a lack of understanding of both go and chess? I understand there may be some cross-sports trash talking, but chess, played at a high level by humans ,…

I can't comment on Go, but with simpler games like Othello it's fairly apparent when your opponent is A.I. driven or human driven, in how they try to move the board position. Even against expert human players.

The AI yesterday played just like a human. You could not tell the human from the AI just based on the moves. That was amazing.
Post reply on HN