211–220 of 596 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
maybe the mistakes were unrecognized brilliant moves (tesujis).
I would love to see an expert analysis of the game, but there were definitely a few moves where AlphaGo was "pushing from behind" that were probably not what an expert human would play.
TD-Gammon was at that point for a while in the early 90s, but the experts caught up, and this changed the generally accepted Backgammon strategies.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So has AlphaGo raised its level so far just by continuing with the games against itself? Or did they just throw their entire server farm at it? (Or both, probably.)
Demis said it used roughly the same hardware resources as against Fan Hui?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not really, the brain to operate also needs all the other systems. Just as a CPU needs all the other parts to function. And including the manufacturing equipment is just as false, in the sense that you would have to include his mother (as biological manufacturing)
The human can run off resources that are available "in the wild", self-repair, and self-replicate at better than 1:1 (that is, a group of n humans produce >n offspring), whereas the smartphone needs a huge amount of infrastructure to repair it and produce new ones. I don't think any mass comparison is really meaningful, mind, but it's not that simple.
My point is, humans "in the wild" likely didn't have any equivalent to chess, because they didn't have sufficient leisure time. Chess is a product of an environment that's just as "artificial" as the one which produced cell phones.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It was designed to be hard to win with the algorithms known to researchers back then. I cannot tell if it has something substantially harder than Go has. High branching factor, deep tree and positions that are hard to evaluate with a simple heuristic are present in Go. Does Arimaa have something else up its sleeve?
I think one of the main things was that you can move up to four pieces (or one piece four times, or two pieces two times, etc) in each turn.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
A computer won the Arimaa challenge last year. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arimaa
I guess the only thing left is to design a game where you can change the rules of the game as a turn.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah according to Redmond, it seemed that AlphaGo made a few "mistakes" whereas Sedol made none. And yet AlphaGo came out substantially ahead. So I'm not sure what that means. Perhaps we need to see more in-depth analysis of the moves, but it seems that AlphaGo just out-calculated Sedol.
I wonder if their move selection algorithm takes into account the "surprise" factor: given two moves that are almost equal in strength when analyzed to a depth of N, chose the one that looks worst at N-1. That is, if all else is equal, assume that you can search deeper than your human opponent, and lay traps accordingly.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
A computer won the Arimaa challenge last year. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arimaa
I guess the only thing left is to design a game where you can change the rules of the game as a turn.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Give it ten years and, between algorithmic optimizations and advances in processing, you'll have an unbeatable Go app on your phone. I find this overly optimistic because of the huge amount of power required to run the Go application. Remember, we're getting closer and closer to the theoretical lower limit in the size of silicon chips, which is around 4nm (that's about a dozen silicon atoms). That's a 3-4x improvem…
Your making the same assumption people made about computing in the 50s, then 70s, then 90s, etc.
I just don't see a 1000x+ decrease in the power required happening in a decade or two without some revolutionary technology I can't even imagine. Is this what you meant? I'm sure most people couldn't imagine modern silicon chips in the 1950s vacuum tube era. But now we're getting close to the theoretical, well-understood minimums in silicon chips, so another revolutionary step is required if another giant leap like that is to be achieved.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
A computer won the Arimaa challenge last year. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arimaa
I guess the only thing left is to design a game where you can change the rules of the game as a turn.