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

AlphaGo beats Lee Sedol again in match 2 of 5

gogameguru.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

481–490 of 576 posts

Re: AlphaGo beats Lee Sedol again in match 2 of 5

#481

Post by javajosh »

kybernetikos wrote: post #115
javajosh wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To address this, has anyone considered pitting AlphaGo against a team of 9p players consulting with each other, and perhaps taking charge of different conflicts on the board?

Part of the reason go is a difficult computational problem is that local conflicts can have global relevance. If it was the kind of thing that could be decomposed easily to different humans then it would be an easier game for a computer to crack.

Yes, particularly because of the sente/gote dynamic. However, it takes time to read individual situations through, and this might be chunked and distributed. The problem, as usual, is efficiently communicating analysis in a useful way. There would probably need to be a hierarchy where "specialists" report to the captain about the battle, and then the captain has to prioritize and decide on the order of action for each region. But the minute detailed analysis for each region would be entirely delegated. Note that leiutenents would be responsible for understanding their region's relationship to the whole, but only the captain is truly responsible for understanding it all.

Re: AlphaGo beats Lee Sedol again in match 2 of 5

#482

Post by jpmattia »

fudged71 wrote: post #452
jpmattia wrote: post #289

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Game 1: https://online-go.com/demo/114754 Game 2: https://online-go.com/demo/114161

You have those two links backwards...

You're right. Too quick with the copy and paste, but now the comment is locked. :(

Re: AlphaGo beats Lee Sedol again in match 2 of 5

#483

Post by gohrt »

astrofinch wrote: post #257
fhe wrote: post #239

As someone who studied AI in college and am a reasonably good amateur player, I have been following the matches between Lee and AlphaGo. AlphaGo plays some unusual moves that go clearly against any classically trained Go players. Moves that simply don't quite fit into the current theories of Go playing, and the world's top players are struggling to explain what's the purpose/strategy behind them. I've been giving it…

There's also the fact that some of the unexpected moves were apparently more about solidifying against a loss than increasing the magnitude of a win. Which has its own kind of eerie implication: since AIs (like all computer programs) do what you say, not what you mean, the "intelligent species" can sometimes work really intelligently towards a goal that wasn't quite what you had in mind. (Gets especially interesting…

> There's also the fact that some of the unexpected moves were apparently more about solidifying against a loss than increasing the magnitude of a win.

Humans play that way too. Everyone wants to maximize the chance of leading by >=1 stone. The difference is that AlphaGo is better at calculating a precise value of a position, so that when uncertainly plays in, AlphaGo can play for, say, "1-3 stone lead", while a human can only get confidence in "1-7 stone lead", and thus needs to play excessively aggressively to overcome the uncertainty.

Re: AlphaGo beats Lee Sedol again in match 2 of 5

#484

Post by emcq »

tzs wrote: post #101
sidko wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seeing the way chess computers have evolved, this won't be far into the future. There are several tournaments just for chess computers, and it is very hard even for grandmasters to follow every more. Somehow, after a 20-move sequence that appears to accomplish nothing, one side is slightly up, and the rest of the game is decided.

> Seeing the way chess computers have evolved, this won't be far into the future. With chess, there were two breakthroughs. First, there was Deep Blue, which threw massive hardware resources at the problem and achieved world champion level play. That was interesting, of course, but didn't really do anything for human chess, because most humans did not have access to the necessary hardware. The second breakthrough was…

Seems like somewhere in-between. They created a novel approach that is scalable and improves as you throw more hardware at it. And Google is throwing a lot of hardware at it based on their past matches with hundreds of CPUs and GPUs. I think the fact that they have been so mum about what hardware they're using suggests it's quite extreme, but hopefully they release more details soon.

Its somewhat interesting to think about the differences in marketing between IBM and Google; IBM was marketing hardware and HPC with deep blue, but Google is marketing AI when so much of their advances in AlphaGo are enabled by distributed systems and HPC running billions of games training deep neural networks. It feels a little smoke and mirrors which is probably why they won't release much until after they get enough marketing value from this tournament :)

Re: AlphaGo beats Lee Sedol again in match 2 of 5

#485

Post by CydeWeys »

School-Cotton wrote: post #456
justicezyx wrote: post #426

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Citation still needed.

He just gave you a citation. "The AlphaGO paper".

This one, I assume? http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v529/n7587/full/nature1...

Looks like citation 46 is the relevant one here.

Re: AlphaGo beats Lee Sedol again in match 2 of 5

#486

Post by rms »

albertzeyer wrote: post #59
pushrax wrote: post #3

If AlphaGo wins all 5 matches, what do you think DeepMind will do with it? My intuition is that they won't continue development, and instead focus on other applications. Great game btw, a pleasure to watch.

StarCraft is their next challenge. :)

And then after Starcraft, no-limit Texas hold 'em is likely.

Re: AlphaGo beats Lee Sedol again in match 2 of 5

#487

Post by CydeWeys »

VladKovac wrote: post #260
gsklee wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On a more realistic side note... Professional Go players devote decades in training ever since their youth, giving up normal educations and lots of other more lucrative opportunities for their lives. It's very easy to imagine their frustrations now that their life-time devotion actually means nothing in front of the AI. It's an upright denial to the way of life they so chose and devoted. IMHO Google should donate the…

Isn't this a good thing? Why are high IQ people devoting their entire lives to a game? Maybe this will make them shift their priorities to solving problems that only really smart humans (like them) can solve.

Abstract strategy games require highly domain specific skills. These skills do not transfer to other endeavors. The world champion Go player might just end up as, had he not played Go, a mid-level lawyer or manager. Who knows. Source: https://books.google.com/books?id=nCMWxjkTAvEC&pg=PA130&lpg=...

Re: AlphaGo beats Lee Sedol again in match 2 of 5

#488

Post by gohrt »

eva1984 wrote: post #179
Cookingboy wrote: post #116

Someone somewhere asked why a lot of people in the Go community is taking this in a somewhat hard way, here is my hypothesis: Go, unlike Chess, has deep mytho attached to it. Throughout the history of many Asian countries it's seen as the ultimate abstract strategy game that deeply relies on players' intuition, personality, worldview. The best players are not described as "smart", they are described as "wise". I thin…

Yeah, can confirm. I am not a Go player, and didn't know much about it. But top Go players are really well respected as some of the highest talents in the society, almost like being feared. It is smart people's game, eventually. And the fact, that, prior to the deep learning revolution, Go is the only board game that human cannot be beaten, add even more myth and charm to the game and players alike. Now, it comes to…

How well would the computer fare if it didn't have access to a library of human-played games, and only got self-study?
Post reply on HN