Is it best of 5 or are they definitely playing 5 matches?
They will play 5 games regardless of the result. I guess it's a great learning opportunity for both sides.
AlphaGo beats Lee Sedol again in match 2 of 5
41–50 of 576 posts
Re: AlphaGo beats Lee Sedol again in match 2 of 5
#42Is there a complete recording of the commentary? They had one for game 1. The current live stream only goes back two hours and doesn't include the beginning of the game.
I'm looking at the DeepMind channel on Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCP7jMXSY2xbc3KCAE0MHQ-A
Re: AlphaGo beats Lee Sedol again in match 2 of 5
#43Human can become tired, emotional and nervous. However, a computer/ software would not have these problems. Especially for Lee, the whole world is looking at him. An "ordinary" human like me won't be able to make the right decisions under this pressure. A great respect to Lee and the Developers of AlphaGo. Good Game!
At the same time, only now are people seeing how its hard for people to play Go against computers. Until AlphaGo I didn't even think computers were close.
Re: AlphaGo beats Lee Sedol again in match 2 of 5
#44I'm totally uninformed about Go, but by now it seems that unless you're clearly in the lead by the end of the midgame, AlphaGo is going to win, simply because at that point its Monte Carlo Tree Search is going to our-compute you in examining all the tactical variations in the endgame. Lee Sedol really seemed to be under a lot of time pressure at the end. EDIT: clarified to what I originally meant: "end of midgame"
[deleted]
Re: AlphaGo beats Lee Sedol again in match 2 of 5
#45This is superb awesome!!!
In future, it will be interesting to see AlphaGo playing against itself!
Re: AlphaGo beats Lee Sedol again in match 2 of 5
#46The next person that will beat alphaGo may not be a top go player. In particular, I'm wondering if a computer scientist with access to the alphaGo source code and all the weights of the network could trick alphaGo in order to win games automatically (cf. the papers that show a neural net can be tricked to classify a plane as any other class). If a human with the knowledge of the source code and the weights can do thi…
You cannot do something unpredictable in a game with strict rules and borders. You had to trick this algorithm the billion times it trained for this game.
Re: AlphaGo beats Lee Sedol again in match 2 of 5
#47I'm totally uninformed about Go, but by now it seems that unless you're clearly in the lead by the end of the midgame, AlphaGo is going to win, simply because at that point its Monte Carlo Tree Search is going to our-compute you in examining all the tactical variations in the endgame. Lee Sedol really seemed to be under a lot of time pressure at the end. EDIT: clarified to what I originally meant: "end of midgame"
It really depends on how good AlphaGo is at avoiding mistakes. If you get critical points on the board, it's possible to create a resilient structure that is defensible against comebacks. But when I play, there are times when I can make an overwhelming comeback because my opponent missed one critical move. I've likewise had it done to me. This is of course probably less common at higher and higher levels of play.
I'm reminded of the time when Deep Blue made a buggy move that totally threw Kasparov off because it was so counterintuitive. But it turned out to be a real mistake. If Kasparov had kept his composure, who knows what could have happened?
http://www.wired.com/2012/09/deep-blue-computer-bug/
Of course, as been stated here, AlphaGo doesn't have the issue of having to keep composure, while Lee does have that issue and pressure. But who's to say that AlphaGo won't make a similar significant mistake, and that Lee won't be able to capitalize on it to make a comeback in that particular game?
edit: admittedly, as pshc as noted, the search space probably grows smaller as the game continues.
edit 2: suddenly, his comment disappeared for some reason?
Re: AlphaGo beats Lee Sedol again in match 2 of 5
#48The next person that will beat alphaGo may not be a top go player. In particular, I'm wondering if a computer scientist with access to the alphaGo source code and all the weights of the network could trick alphaGo in order to win games automatically (cf. the papers that show a neural net can be tricked to classify a plane as any other class). If a human with the knowledge of the source code and the weights can do thi…
I think this is less relevant
Tricking the NN works in a no noise situation, also an image has many more parameters than a Go board
Re: AlphaGo beats Lee Sedol again in match 2 of 5
#49I find it very interesting that to a layperson, the idea of a computer being able to beat a human at a logic game is pretty much expected and uninteresting.
You try and share this story with a non-technical person and they will likely say "Well, duh..it's a computer".
Re: AlphaGo beats Lee Sedol again in match 2 of 5
#50Human can become tired, emotional and nervous. However, a computer/ software would not have these problems. Especially for Lee, the whole world is looking at him. An "ordinary" human like me won't be able to make the right decisions under this pressure. A great respect to Lee and the Developers of AlphaGo. Good Game!
At the same time, only now are people seeing how its hard for people to play Go against computers. Until AlphaGo I didn't even think computers were close.
I know how hard it is. I still cannot beat my 15 year-old PDA when playing chess with it. The intelligence of Lee is far higher than I can interpret.