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

AlphaFold 3 predicts the structure and interactions of life's molecules

blog.google

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

481–490 of 504 posts

Re: AlphaFold 3 predicts the structure and interactions of life's molecules

#481

Post by nybsjytm »

thom wrote: post #479
GaggiX wrote: post #472

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>all its ideas were absorbed into Stockfish That's not true at all, Stockfish still uses only human heuristics for search and NNUE for eval, a completely different architecture than alphazero and derived from the Yu Nasu Shogi engine.

It's a neural network trained on self-play games (many of them lifted from Leela Zero). I get that it's a different shape of network, but people really seem touchy about crediting Google with the kick up the bum that led us here. AlphaZero had a massive effect on chess globally, whatever people think about its press releases. My main point is that people should update the heuristic that wastes energy arguing about bo…

I don't have any particular thoughts about DeepMind's board game algorithms or how they were advertised, but even if I happened to think it was the most innovative and influential research in years, I'd still ask for honest communication about the work. It's part of being a healthy research community - although clearly the AI community falls well short on this, and nobody could say it's only DeepMind's fault.

Re: AlphaFold 3 predicts the structure and interactions of life's molecules

#482

Post by GaggiX »

thom wrote: post #479
GaggiX wrote: post #472

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>all its ideas were absorbed into Stockfish That's not true at all, Stockfish still uses only human heuristics for search and NNUE for eval, a completely different architecture than alphazero and derived from the Yu Nasu Shogi engine.

It's a neural network trained on self-play games (many of them lifted from Leela Zero). I get that it's a different shape of network, but people really seem touchy about crediting Google with the kick up the bum that led us here. AlphaZero had a massive effect on chess globally, whatever people think about its press releases. My main point is that people should update the heuristic that wastes energy arguing about bo…

>It's a neural network trained on self-play games

It's not, it's just supervised learning on evaluations. There is no self-play involved when training the model.

Re: AlphaFold 3 predicts the structure and interactions of life's molecules

#483

Post by thom »

GaggiX wrote: post #482
thom wrote: post #479

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a neural network trained on self-play games (many of them lifted from Leela Zero). I get that it's a different shape of network, but people really seem touchy about crediting Google with the kick up the bum that led us here. AlphaZero had a massive effect on chess globally, whatever people think about its press releases. My main point is that people should update the heuristic that wastes energy arguing about bo…

>It's a neural network trained on self-play games It's not, it's just supervised learning on evaluations. There is no self-play involved when training the model.

Where do the evaluations come from? The idea that Stockfish isn't benefiting hugely from Google having created and advertised AlphaZero is preposterous, can we please just stop?

Re: AlphaFold 3 predicts the structure and interactions of life's molecules

#484

Post by GaggiX »

thom wrote: post #483
GaggiX wrote: post #482

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>It's a neural network trained on self-play games It's not, it's just supervised learning on evaluations. There is no self-play involved when training the model.

Where do the evaluations come from? The idea that Stockfish isn't benefiting hugely from Google having created and advertised AlphaZero is preposterous, can we please just stop?

>Where do the evaluations come from?

Good datasets are selected empirically, they are usually a mix of different sources, not a single engine.

>The idea that Stockfish isn't benefiting hugely from Google having created and advertised AlphaZero is preposterous, can we please just stop?

I have not said anything about AlphaZero, I am just reporting where you are wrong. Your arguments are simply not very convincing.

Re: AlphaFold 3 predicts the structure and interactions of life's molecules

#485

Post by thom »

GaggiX wrote: post #484
thom wrote: post #483

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Where do the evaluations come from? The idea that Stockfish isn't benefiting hugely from Google having created and advertised AlphaZero is preposterous, can we please just stop?

>Where do the evaluations come from? Good datasets are selected empirically, they are usually a mix of different sources, not a single engine. >The idea that Stockfish isn't benefiting hugely from Google having created and advertised AlphaZero is preposterous, can we please just stop? I have not said anything about AlphaZero, I am just reporting where you are wrong. Your arguments are simply not very convincing.

Okay, well, no sale I guess. Stockfish's training dataset is mostly self-play games from an engine directly inspired by AlphaZero. It moved to neural network evaluation after a fork based on a paper that cites AlphaZero. It plays chess more like AlphaZero than Stockfish 11. Yes, it's extremely interesting that it continues to edge out Leela with a fast, rough approximation of the latter's evaluation but much faster search. But it (and human chess) wouldn't be where it is today without AlphaZero, and I was originally responding to someone dismissing it based on the perceived over-zealousness of its marketing, as people seem to want to do with TFA. I merely submit that both of these Google innovations are exciting and impactful, and we should forgive their presentation, which nevertheless has been kind enough to link to the original papers which have all the information we need to help change the world.

Re: AlphaFold 3 predicts the structure and interactions of life's molecules

#486

Post by nybsjytm »

thom wrote: post #485
GaggiX wrote: post #484

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Where do the evaluations come from? Good datasets are selected empirically, they are usually a mix of different sources, not a single engine. >The idea that Stockfish isn't benefiting hugely from Google having created and advertised AlphaZero is preposterous, can we please just stop? I have not said anything about AlphaZero, I am just reporting where you are wrong. Your arguments are simply not very convincing.

Okay, well, no sale I guess. Stockfish's training dataset is mostly self-play games from an engine directly inspired by AlphaZero. It moved to neural network evaluation after a fork based on a paper that cites AlphaZero. It plays chess more like AlphaZero than Stockfish 11. Yes, it's extremely interesting that it continues to edge out Leela with a fast, rough approximation of the latter's evaluation but much faster s…

> someone dismissing it based on the perceived over-zealousness of its marketing, as people seem to want to do with TFA

Sorry, but that's nothing but a reading comprehension problem for you

Re: AlphaFold 3 predicts the structure and interactions of life's molecules

#487

Post by kriro »

AlexCoventry wrote: post #471
kriro wrote: post #419

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think Alphazero is a lot more interesting than Stockfish though. Most notably it lead me to reevaluate positional play. Iirc A0 at around 2-3 ply is still above SuperGM Level which is pretty mind-blowing. Based on this I have increased my strategy to tactics ratio quite a bit. FWIW Stockfish is always evolving and adapting and has incorporated ideas from A0.

How do you train for strategic thinking in chess? I read a book on positional chess once, but that's as far as I've gone.

The first thing I'd recommend is constantly evaluating positions from a strategic POV ("Evaluate like a GM" is a good book, alternatively look at a lot of positions and evaluate like you were an engine and then engine check).

Second (or first if you lack even the basics to do said evaluation) is understand strategic concepts. A good starting point would be "Simple Chess" the next step would be pawn structures ("Power of Pawns" -> "Chess Structures" would be my recommendations, the latter is probably the greatest chess book in recent times imo). There's also many Chessable courses, I'm quite fond of "Developing Chess Intuition" by GM Raven Sturt and the "Art of..." series by CM Can Kabadayi for lower rated players. The sky is the limit, there's good books all the way up, for example "Mastering Chess Strategy" usually recommended for 2000+ ELO

Third study great positional players like Carlsen, Karpov, Petrosian etc.

I'd say the most important thing to realize is that just like tactics puzzles, there's strategic puzzles but they are not as obvious.

Re: AlphaFold 3 predicts the structure and interactions of life's molecules

#488

Post by thom »

nybsjytm wrote: post #486
thom wrote: post #485

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Okay, well, no sale I guess. Stockfish's training dataset is mostly self-play games from an engine directly inspired by AlphaZero. It moved to neural network evaluation after a fork based on a paper that cites AlphaZero. It plays chess more like AlphaZero than Stockfish 11. Yes, it's extremely interesting that it continues to edge out Leela with a fast, rough approximation of the latter's evaluation but much faster s…

> someone dismissing it based on the perceived over-zealousness of its marketing, as people seem to want to do with TFA Sorry, but that's nothing but a reading comprehension problem for you

A lot of that going around. Have a great weekend.
Post reply on HN