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

Watch an AI bot play Go [video]

facebook.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 48 posts

Re: Watch an AI bot play Go [video]

#31

Post by hyperpape »

RobertoG wrote: post #26
hyperpape wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is hard to evaluate. Explicit metrics would be good, but there's also a definitional point. Depending on who you ask, existing AI programs are as good as a very strong human player. Others will scoff at that characterization. The problem is what "very strong" means. Precisely, current programs can beat many professionals with a 4 stone handicap. Making good analogies is hard, but here's mine: current go programs…

But, surely, they are going to improve the system, and fast. I would bet that in a few years is going to be clear who is superior, the machine or the human.

There was a huge improvement in the period of roughly 2005 through a few years ago, at which point programs seemed to be making only slow, incremental progress. At the current rate, it looks like we're talking at least a decade to reach full professional status.

I guess Facebook is claiming they're upending that, but that remains to be seen.

Re: Watch an AI bot play Go [video]

#32

Post by jlees »

RBerenguel wrote: post #2

From the short description, it looks like a project from Google about training a deep network to play the game. The resulting bot was quite strong (or at least, quite strong for not using Monte Carlo tree search, at least). Without any more details though, it's hard to tell.

Implementing a Go player using neural networks and reinforcement learning is really fun and taught me a lot about how said techniques work. I only covered the (much easier) 9x9 board, but would recommend it as an exercise to those interested :)

Re: Watch an AI bot play Go [video]

#33

Post by NhanH »

jordigh wrote: post #29
cjbprime wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Go should just be labeled Gogame in contrast to Golang. At the same time, there's something amusing about the idea that a six year-old programming language should cause a 2000 year old game to change its name.

It's also kind of weird we call it by its (newer) Japanese name instead of weiqi.

There was a reason for that though. Before the latter half of the 20th century Japanese go scene kind of dominated for several centuries (thanks to official shogun sponsor).

Re: Watch an AI bot play Go [video]

#35

Post by hyperpape »

NhanH wrote: post #28
hyperpape wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is hard to evaluate. Explicit metrics would be good, but there's also a definitional point. Depending on who you ask, existing AI programs are as good as a very strong human player. Others will scoff at that characterization. The problem is what "very strong" means. Precisely, current programs can beat many professionals with a 4 stone handicap. Making good analogies is hard, but here's mine: current go programs…

Another easier comparison for anyone not familiar with how good 2:45 marathon is (like me). Right now current programs are around ~2500 ELO in chess, or about the weaker part of most International Grandmaster in chess.

You're right that the comparison won't work for everyone. Here's another: Franz-Josef-Dickhut, currently the 54th strongest player in Europe[1] just won 3-1 against Zen, a top program. He did the same last year against CrazyStone, another top program. There are strong European players, but much fewer than in China, Japan, Korea or Taiwan. So there are thousands, perhaps even ten thousand humans still stronger than the best programs.[2]

However, the ELO figure seems high to me. A go handicap stone is probably more than 100 ELO at those levels, because high level players are good at conserving small advantages. Additionally, the players in these exhibition matches are usually themselves not the top players in the world. For instance, Zhou Junxun or Ishida Yoshio are two I recall off the top of my head.[2]

[1] http://europeangodatabase.eu/EGD/createalleuro3.php?country=...

[2] If you know how many humans can run a 2:45 marathon, let me know! I know Boston lets you in with a 3:05 time if you're 18-34, and tens of thousands of people run that (some of them are older or women, but many eligible people don't compete...). I'm kinda spitballing on the exact times, but that's roughly how I want to do the comparison.

[3] (http://www.goratings.org/).

Re: Watch an AI bot play Go [video]

#36

Post by hyperpape »

freethinky wrote: post #25
AndrewKemendo wrote: post #17

After a few months of playing ... it's as good as a very strong human player. This is potentially a really big breakthrough if true, as Go is much harder than Chess computationally. Nobody knows about Go in the West though so don't expect any headlines.

I spent several years in Asia and never met someone playing Go, just a few Chinese chess players. Would it really make headlines anywhere?

Yes. Something like ten million people in Korea play go. It's astonishingly popular there.

Re: Watch an AI bot play Go [video]

#37

Post by hyperpape »

NhanH wrote: post #33
jordigh wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's also kind of weird we call it by its (newer) Japanese name instead of weiqi.

There was a reason for that though. Before the latter half of the 20th century Japanese go scene kind of dominated for several centuries (thanks to official shogun sponsor).

More importantly, until the past few decades, Japan did the majority of the go outreach in the West. That's changed a bit, and thanks to Korean influence, it's more common to hear people saying "baduk".

Re: Watch an AI bot play Go [video]

#39

Post by hangonhn »

hyperpape wrote: post #35
NhanH wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Another easier comparison for anyone not familiar with how good 2:45 marathon is (like me). Right now current programs are around ~2500 ELO in chess, or about the weaker part of most International Grandmaster in chess.

You're right that the comparison won't work for everyone. Here's another: Franz-Josef-Dickhut, currently the 54th strongest player in Europe[1] just won 3-1 against Zen, a top program. He did the same last year against CrazyStone, another top program. There are strong European players, but much fewer than in China, Japan, Korea or Taiwan. So there are thousands, perhaps even ten thousand humans still stronger than th…

2:45 marathon would generally put you in the elite but non-professional class and give you a good shot of being in the top 10 for the smaller marathons. That's where many former collegiate runners would be able to do.

A good way to do comparison might be to do the percentile. 2:45 would put you in the 76 percentile.

http://www.heartbreakhill.org/age_graded.htm

Post reply on HN