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

Deepmind Alphadev: Faster sorting algorithms discovered using deep RL

nature.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 328 posts

Re: Deepmind Alphadev: Faster sorting algorithms discovered using deep RL

#131

Post by rcxdude »

TaupeRanger wrote: post #114
orlp wrote: post #91

> AlphaDev uncovered new sorting algorithms that led to improvements in the LLVM libc++ sorting library that were up to 70% faster for shorter sequences and about 1.7% faster for sequences exceeding 250,000 elements. As someone that knows a thing or two about sorting... bullshit. No new algorithms were uncovered, and the work here did not lead to the claimed improvements. They found a sequence of assembly that saves.…

This is DeepMind's modus operandi. Every press release is just utterly hyperbolic nonsense that doesn't withstand the slightest scrutiny. AlphaGo, AlphaFold, AlphaDev... they've done literally nothing to improve the human condition, and may have actually made things worse. Go players have DECREASED their Elo after playing AlphaGo (or just quit the game altogether). I would be embarrassed to be associated with DeepMin…

I think this is a bit far in the other direction. Deepmind's stuff is often deeply impressive, they just have a tendency to exaggerate on top of that.

Re: Deepmind Alphadev: Faster sorting algorithms discovered using deep RL

#132

Post by rcxdude »

scotty79 wrote: post #123
vosper wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Go players have DECREASED their ELO after playing AlphaGo (or just quit the game altogether) Can you explain this for someone unfamiliar with the game?

Maybe they just lost so their ELO went down? Or do loses against AI not count?

Either way, in ELO it depends on the ELO of your opponent, and so a loss against an AI with an accurate (very high) ELO is not going to lose you much unless you're one of the best players in the world (heck, in chess, Magnus Carlsen's ELO would still go down by literally nothing from losing against stockfish).

Re: Deepmind Alphadev: Faster sorting algorithms discovered using deep RL

#133

Post by danlark »

orlp wrote: post #91

> AlphaDev uncovered new sorting algorithms that led to improvements in the LLVM libc++ sorting library that were up to 70% faster for shorter sequences and about 1.7% faster for sequences exceeding 250,000 elements. As someone that knows a thing or two about sorting... bullshit. No new algorithms were uncovered, and the work here did not lead to the claimed improvements. They found a sequence of assembly that saves.…

I agree on the sorting front. Removing one cmov is not likely to improve much.

Re: Deepmind Alphadev: Faster sorting algorithms discovered using deep RL

#134

Post by pitaj »

VikingCoder wrote: post #67

Dumb question - Where are the machine learning de-compilers? Given an executable program, give me human-readable code that generates the executable exactly. With machine learning guessed function, type, variable names...? I get that it's a very hard problem. But... Does it just not work? Or have people not done it yet? Or have I missed it?

This actually doesn't sound that difficult, given we can produce a practically infinite training dataset using a compiler with existing programs.

What's more interesting to me would be a model that can automatically port a program between languages, such as converting a C program to a fairly idiomatic Rust program.

Re: Deepmind Alphadev: Faster sorting algorithms discovered using deep RL

#135

Post by blazespin »

lurknot wrote: post #122
blazespin wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I bet it really sucks, tbh. They did all this over promising and now the only way they can deliver is by grifting like this. That sounds really stressful to me.

ya bet it sucks making $500-800k/year comp getting access to the best hardware and google datasets

I've seen people who get promoted above their band, they are not happy campers.

Re: Deepmind Alphadev: Faster sorting algorithms discovered using deep RL

#136

Post by bigcheesegs »

petschge wrote: post #129
scotty79 wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Shouldn't libc++ be kinda good? Since it's the standard and all? Why isn't/wasn't it?

The LLVM implementation of libc++ is very young compared to other implementations (it was started 5 years ago or so), so there is still a lot of things missing and a lot of things that can be improved.

libc++ was open sourced May 11th 2010. 13 years ago. https://blog.llvm.org/2010/05/new-libc-c-standard-library.ht...

Re: Deepmind Alphadev: Faster sorting algorithms discovered using deep RL

#137

Post by programmer_dude »

TaupeRanger wrote: post #114
orlp wrote: post #91

> AlphaDev uncovered new sorting algorithms that led to improvements in the LLVM libc++ sorting library that were up to 70% faster for shorter sequences and about 1.7% faster for sequences exceeding 250,000 elements. As someone that knows a thing or two about sorting... bullshit. No new algorithms were uncovered, and the work here did not lead to the claimed improvements. They found a sequence of assembly that saves.…

This is DeepMind's modus operandi. Every press release is just utterly hyperbolic nonsense that doesn't withstand the slightest scrutiny. AlphaGo, AlphaFold, AlphaDev... they've done literally nothing to improve the human condition, and may have actually made things worse. Go players have DECREASED their Elo after playing AlphaGo (or just quit the game altogether). I would be embarrassed to be associated with DeepMin…

BTW Elo is not an abbreviation it is a persons name: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arpad_Elo

Re: Deepmind Alphadev: Faster sorting algorithms discovered using deep RL

#138

Post by orlp »

danlark wrote: post #133
orlp wrote: post #91

> AlphaDev uncovered new sorting algorithms that led to improvements in the LLVM libc++ sorting library that were up to 70% faster for shorter sequences and about 1.7% faster for sequences exceeding 250,000 elements. As someone that knows a thing or two about sorting... bullshit. No new algorithms were uncovered, and the work here did not lead to the claimed improvements. They found a sequence of assembly that saves.…

I agree on the sorting front. Removing one cmov is not likely to improve much.

It's not even a cmov. Look at Figure 3 in the paper: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-023-06004-9

They eliminated a register-register mov.

Re: Deepmind Alphadev: Faster sorting algorithms discovered using deep RL

#139

Post by jimsimmons »

blazespin wrote: post #135
lurknot wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

ya bet it sucks making $500-800k/year comp getting access to the best hardware and google datasets

I've seen people who get promoted above their band, they are not happy campers.

Why not. It’s not like they have deadlines

Re: Deepmind Alphadev: Faster sorting algorithms discovered using deep RL

#140

Post by nahstra »

dfan wrote: post #127
vosper wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Go players have DECREASED their ELO after playing AlphaGo (or just quit the game altogether) Can you explain this for someone unfamiliar with the game?

I am familiar with the game and I cannot explain it. Go is not typically rated with the Elo system, and the quality of top-level human play has increased since 2016.

I also play some, and yeah that's incorrect. Also, there was recently a bunch of hype about an adversarial strategy that could beat AIs w/o deep readout (i.e. only using the 'policy network' nonlinear ML stuff and not enough actual calculation). Here's a vid of an amateur doing it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H4DvCj4ySKM

EDIT:

Also, if you want to get into it, Micheal Redmond's Go TV on youtube has an amazing beginner playlist, watch some of that then maybe blacktoplay.com and if you likey play :)

Post reply on HN