dgdhgfsegfs
DeepText: Facebook's text understanding engine
131–140 of 142 posts
Re: DeepText: Facebook's text understanding engine
#132sgfdsgfdsgfsdgf
Re: DeepText: Facebook's text understanding engine
#133sgfdsgfdsgfsdgf
Re: DeepText: Facebook's text understanding engine
#134gfd
Re: DeepText: Facebook's text understanding engine
#135gfd
Re: DeepText: Facebook's text understanding engine
#136Earlier quoted context omitted.
In that case, stockfish doesn't use minimax either right, because it does pruning as well
No, stockfish uses minimax with pruning. Minimax and MCTS are just different algorithms. MCTS simulates games randomly and creates a distribution of expected value for each one based on some cool math. It estimates the value of each state based on a sample. Minimax actually calculates them all (or all of them except for some pruned ones). That's the whole reason MCTS can work on Go and minimax doesn't. Minimax actual…
> No, stockfish uses minimax with pruning... Minimax actually needs to look at all possible branches all the way down.
No, I assure you that stockfish definitely does not look "all the way down (ie to states where the game is over)" in most positions, even with pruning - that would take too long. It uses a static evaluation function to evaluate positions without searching down the tree further.
> MCTS simulates games randomly and creates a distribution of expected value for each one based on some cool math.
You described the "Monte Carlo" part of MCTS but not the "Tree Search" part. It's right in the name! See for example the first paragraph on page 20 of https://gogameguru.com/i/2016/03/deepmind-mastering-go.pdf, which clearly describes AG constructing a search tree.
Minimax obviously will produce perfect play in both chess and Go, but we can't use it because it takes too long. Hence we prune and truncate the search tree. When we truncate it we use an approximation of the value of the node (the static evaluation function); when we prune we sometimes use the static evaluation function as well. This is true in both MCTS and in Stockfish.
Re: DeepText: Facebook's text understanding engine
#137Earlier quoted context omitted.
This sounds like a bug / coincidence. I've never got a later email about something that happened live while I was browsing the site, and was already notified about.
A couple of times is a coincidence. I stopped counting after seven. So you're saying that there's a bug. And the bug waits for me to stop using Facebook, then emails me things from Facebook. I find this quite difficult to believe. At the least, it's a very convenient bug.
The bug isn't that you get emailed about things only after you've left, that's the feature.
The bug would be to get emailed about things that happened while you were using the site and were notified in real time about already.
Re: DeepText: Facebook's text understanding engine
#138Earlier quoted context omitted.
People in the general public don't really have a clear idea about what Facebook, Google, and Amazon are doing. Still, most people I know are vaguely aware that there's something creepy going on. They aren't really comfortable with Facebook, Inc owning their digital social life, but they rely on it because of the obvious network effect. Try asking someone "hey, you know Facebook use a lot of state-of-the-art technolog…
Or maybe Facebook is still doing fine since there is no good enough alternative. It seems like Facebook is getting worse all the time but since everybody's there and it's familiar people still uses it. Indicators are they are losing young people, who tend to adapt faster and have not yet build habit of use and more and more people are using other services for particular activities. Still there is nothing which could…
The problem with your argument is that you admit "the statistics look good" but then present a bunch of unsubstantiated personal opinions ("getting worse all the time", "boring") that are just not supported by the available data.
Re: DeepText: Facebook's text understanding engine
#139Earlier quoted context omitted.
Could Facebook be doing so well because this is actually a win-win situation for everyone involved ? That includes the people you mentioned yes, but also users who get to use a valuable tool for free. The whole "if it's free, you are the product" party line may resonate in HN circles, but you have to realize the public as a whole doesn't think it's a bad deal at all.
People in the general public don't really have a clear idea about what Facebook, Google, and Amazon are doing. Still, most people I know are vaguely aware that there's something creepy going on. They aren't really comfortable with Facebook, Inc owning their digital social life, but they rely on it because of the obvious network effect. Try asking someone "hey, you know Facebook use a lot of state-of-the-art technolog…
>People in the general public don't really have a clear idea about what Facebook, Google, and Amazon are doing.
But neither do you really, right ?
Sure, you may have a better idea than them of what's technically feasible, but the general HN consensus on the motives, values and internal decision-making process at these companies ("always assume the worst from them, they're optimizing for money!") is in my experience (of working at FB a few years ago) a simplistic view that's way, way off the mark.
>"hey, you know Facebook use a lot of state-of-the-art technology to algorithmically understand the meaning of everything you post and write, feeding this massive data set into their huge artificial intelligence program?" I don't think it's likely that many people will say "cool, that sounds like a great deal, because I love it when I get very specifically targetted ads."
I think this is again where nerd-bias is misleading you : 1) Many people would answer your question with "yeah ? is this the thing that enables translations, picture captions for the blind and suggests me events I might like ? Please, bring it on!" 2) people actually do prefer very specifically targeted ads, rather than annoying+irrelevant pop-up banners of the past. This is why FB is making a killing.
Re: DeepText: Facebook's text understanding engine
#140Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, stockfish uses minimax with pruning. Minimax and MCTS are just different algorithms. MCTS simulates games randomly and creates a distribution of expected value for each one based on some cool math. It estimates the value of each state based on a sample. Minimax actually calculates them all (or all of them except for some pruned ones). That's the whole reason MCTS can work on Go and minimax doesn't. Minimax actual…
> No, stockfish uses minimax with pruning... Minimax actually needs to look at all possible branches all the way down. No, I assure you that stockfish definitely does not look "all the way down (ie to states where the game is over)" in most positions, even with pruning - that would take too long. It uses a static evaluation function to evaluate positions without searching down the tree further. > MCTS simulates games…
>No, I assure you that stockfish definitely does not look "all the way down (ie to states where the game is over)" in most positions, even with pruning - that would take too long. It uses a static evaluation function to evaluate positions without searching down the tree further
Ehh alright, it calculates the value of a node exactly (or exactly assuming its evaluation function). MCTS does not.
To be clear, what I meant, that you pulled out of context is that Minimax requires an exact calculation of the value of each child before choosing the best and returning it, this requires either simulating every possible game, or an evaluation function (depth-pruning). MCTS uses monte-carlo methods to estimate the best paths instead of trying all of them naively. At t=infinity, MCTS is equivalent to Minimax, because it will try all nodes. But it can run in time constrained systems better because it picks a much smarter order to run in.
>You described the "Monte Carlo" part of MCTS but not the "Tree Search" part. It's right in the name! See for example the first paragraph on page 20 of https://gogameguru.com/i/2016/03/deepmind-mastering-go.pdf, which clearly describes AG constructing a search tree.
yes. That has nothing to do with minimax though.
Which is what I said. AlphaGo uses pruning. AlphaGo doesn't use minimax with or without pruning, it uses MCTS (with pruning).