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

Lee Sedol Beats AlphaGo in Game 4

gogameguru.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 471 posts

Re: Lee Sedol Beats AlphaGo in Game 4

#171

Post by david-given »

oska wrote: post #108
jballanc wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From my limited knowledge of the game, a few of the moves that Lee made before AlphaGo "lost its mind" were a tad on the aggressive side. The conventional wisdom in Go is to prefer more conservative moves (increasingly so as the game progresses). Usually, if your opponent is being overly aggressive then you want to play more conservatively and wait for them to make a mistake, but in AlphaGo's case, it attempted to ma…

> If I had to guess (and this is pure speculation), AlphaGo has no concept of waiting for its opponent to make a mistake. Instead, it assumes its opponent will continue to make the best possible follow-ups One of the DeepMind guys just confirmed that this is how AlphaGo operates in the press conference.

"When you're up against someone smarter than you are, do something insane and let them think themselves to death."

-- Pyanfar Chanur (C.J. Cherryh)

Re: Lee Sedol Beats AlphaGo in Game 4

#172

Post by overmille »

Now that we have two points for interpolation, expectations are down to near best human competency in go using distributed computation. Also from move 79 to 87 the machine wasn't able to detect the weak position, that shows its weakness. Now Lee can try and aggressive strategy creating multiple hot points of attacks to defeat his enemy. The human player is showing the power of intelligence.

Re: Lee Sedol Beats AlphaGo in Game 4

#175

Post by agumonkey »

jballanc wrote: post #56

So AlphaGo is just a bot after all... Toward the end AlphaGo was making moves that even I (as a double-digit kyu player) could recognize as really bad. However, one of the commentators made the observation that each time it did, the moves forced a highly-predictable move by Lee Sedol in response. From the point of view of a Go player, they were non-sensical because they only removed points from the board and didn't a…

A bit like getting a confused parser back on track. We've witnessed the first digital cold sweat.

Re: Lee Sedol Beats AlphaGo in Game 4

#176

Post by JabavuAdams »

antonioalegria wrote: post #114

Don't want to sound all Conspiracy Theory but somehow this feels planned.. It plays into DeepMind's hand to not have the machine completely trouncing the human. It's less scary and keeps people engaged further into the future. Also seems in-line with the way Demis was "rooting" for the human this time – they already won so now they focus on PR.

It doesn't seem that plausible if you've been around serious game players. The notion of throwing a game would be seen as extremely rude and condescending to one's opponent.

Once you step on to the field, you play your best. It doesn't matter whether the opponent is a master, or a six-year-old.

EDIT> I have a friend who I've never beaten at an RTS or non-random strategy game, even though we've played hundreds of times. If I thought for a moment that he'd let me win, I'd stop playing, and I hate losing.

Re: Lee Sedol Beats AlphaGo in Game 4

#177

Post by versteegen »

apetresc wrote: post #132
versteegen wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ah! This matches up with Demis' tweet that black's 79th move was later determined to be a mistake. In MCTS you wouldn't normally go back to moves you've already played unless it's an incomplete information game. However I guess for reinforcement learning (even if it's not actually done during these matches), you would go back and update the estimated values of moves already played, which explains how they know that.

Demis clarified what he meant by that in a subsequent tweet – it wasn't that AlphaGo re-evaluated move 79, it's that the winrate only plummeted after move 87, which was beyond the point of no return: https://twitter.com/demishassabis/status/708934687926804482

But he called move 79 a mistake. So did he learn from a human commentator that it was a mistake, or was that AlphaGo's assessment?

Because it is actually trivial in MCTS to reevaluate moves already taken once you have a better assessment of the positions that follow it.

Re: Lee Sedol Beats AlphaGo in Game 4

#178

Post by tux1968 »

Joof wrote: post #155
tux1968 wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

AlphaGo will learn from any new styles and apply them effectively without mistakes from fatigue or inattention. This incarnation of AI is not creative, it wont generate new play styles, that is still the domain of top human players for now. But it will ruthlessly learn and adopt any new and improved strategies. That's really the point to take away from its success so far.

AlphaGo mostly plays against itself, meaning it learns in a very separate environment. It certainly might come up with novel strategies.

I suppose that's possible. However Demis Hassabis has said many people have noted that AlphaGo makes human-like moves. He commented that it made sense since AlphaGo taught itself from the games of human players.

Re: Lee Sedol Beats AlphaGo in Game 4

#179

Post by silasdavis »

Angostura wrote: post #149
dba7dba wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've read some articles in Korean press that suggested AlphaGo team picked Lee as their match and not Ke Jie (currently #1 ranked, 19 years young) because there's a lot more public records of Lee's plays over his much longer pro career (nearly 20 years now). Thus more material for AlphaGo to train with and against. So it's not totally arrogant of Ke Jie to suggest he could beat AlphaGo. AlphaGo has not much 'experien…

Err, so if AlphaGo wins game 5, does that show 'an AI is still indeed more capable than any human?'

Exactly. The faint whiff of bullshit.
Post reply on HN