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

Go grandmaster Shin defeats AI KataGo with a two-stone handicap

kedglobal.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 190 posts

Re: Go grandmaster Shin defeats AI KataGo with a two-stone handicap

#51

Post by gamegoblin »

hyperpape wrote: post #37
rao-v wrote: post #5

It’s worth understanding that Shin Jinse has been significantly stronger than his nearest human opponents for a while now, more so than Magnus was even at his very peak. In go ELO like scoring he’s something like 120 points over the next strongest player. No other player has ever broken a 3800 rating let alone 3850. Ke Jie (the previous long time champion) peaked at 3755. Shin Jinseo’s strength graph is the most absu…

You're right that Shin Jinseo is a generational talent, and more dominant than anyone since Lee Changho (peaked in the 90s and was strong into the early-mid 2000s). However, you can't compare goratings over time, the top ranks are not nearly stable enough. https://www.goratings.org/en/history/ (I think it's believable Shin Jinseo is better than Lee Changho, but not that there has been steady progress since the days o…

Could you just have superhuman Go AI just how good humans are somewhat more objectively?

Not without flaws of course, but probably interesting

Re: Go grandmaster Shin defeats AI KataGo with a two-stone handicap

#52

Post by zamadatix »

rao-v wrote: post #5

It’s worth understanding that Shin Jinse has been significantly stronger than his nearest human opponents for a while now, more so than Magnus was even at his very peak. In go ELO like scoring he’s something like 120 points over the next strongest player. No other player has ever broken a 3800 rating let alone 3850. Ke Jie (the previous long time champion) peaked at 3755. Shin Jinseo’s strength graph is the most absu…

For another comparison, top world class chess players will have solid odds to beat Leela Chess Zero when given a knight odds handicap (Leela Chess Zero starts with 1 fewer knight). For human vs human, I think this would be somewhere in the ballpark of the ~10,000th best chess player having fair odds against Magnus.

I wonder if this means the best Go play is closer to theoretically perfect play or if it just happened the current computer methods didn't manage to get much farther than humans. Go has vastly more valid games but also a simpler ruleset, so I'm not sure if there is really a good way to tell beyond "keep trying and find out"?

Re: Go grandmaster Shin defeats AI KataGo with a two-stone handicap

#53

Post by thataccount »

I don't know what the fascination with these AI versus human tournaments is. I'm old enough to remember the whole "Deep Blue" vs Kasparov exhibition, and I didn't really understand the fascination with all that either. That humans can make sufficiently strong calculators has never been a dispute in my mind. If the human wins over the calculator, good, but if the calculator wins, okay. What does that tell us exactly? The human had a bad day? The machine had a good one?

Re: Go grandmaster Shin defeats AI KataGo with a two-stone handicap

#54

Post by [deleted] »

thangalin wrote: post #16

In Go, there are exchanges of plays called "joseki". Professionals consider the outcome of joseki to be an equal result for both players. Most joseki are only a handful of moves, but some, such as the "flying knife" joseki have variations that continue for upwards of 50 moves. A traditional 19x19 go board has 361 intersections. Shin's genius was to play out a complex variation of the flying knife joseki that was, in…

[deleted]

Re: Go grandmaster Shin defeats AI KataGo with a two-stone handicap

#55

Post by zmgsabst »

mtlmtlmtlmtl wrote: post #42
thangalin wrote: post #16

In Go, there are exchanges of plays called "joseki". Professionals consider the outcome of joseki to be an equal result for both players. Most joseki are only a handful of moves, but some, such as the "flying knife" joseki have variations that continue for upwards of 50 moves. A traditional 19x19 go board has 361 intersections. Shin's genius was to play out a complex variation of the flying knife joseki that was, in…

I have some questions as a chess player who barely even understands the rules of go. First these josekis sound like what in chess is called a forced tactical sequence. When you say Shin played out a long complex joseki, how does he do that? Does he have to read/calculate it out over the board(50 moves seems crazy to me unless the search tree is highly constrained by geometry/deduction/very few candidate moves, which…

Joseki are akin to book openings in chess, eg, we routinely see players going 20+ moves entirely from AI prep.

Re: Go grandmaster Shin defeats AI KataGo with a two-stone handicap

#56

Post by harshreality »

afthonos wrote: post #24
rao-v wrote: post #5

It’s worth understanding that Shin Jinse has been significantly stronger than his nearest human opponents for a while now, more so than Magnus was even at his very peak. In go ELO like scoring he’s something like 120 points over the next strongest player. No other player has ever broken a 3800 rating let alone 3850. Ke Jie (the previous long time champion) peaked at 3755. Shin Jinseo’s strength graph is the most absu…

Important to note that KataGo was double-handicapped. 20 seconds per move maximum; it couldn’t read deep. Against an amateur, it doesn’t matter, but against a historically strong pro it matters a lot.

...on a 4x 3090 rig. The game ran 299 moves, giving katago 100 minutes if it exhausted time on each move (which must be the optimal strategy under that time control). Shin used about 205 minutes, over twice as much time and of course had leeway to spend more time on difficult moves.

Based on the youtube video, it looks like katago was only using 16 seconds per move, is that right? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-86zF4mTWOY

Is 20 seconds on that hardware really overkill and well into the diminishing-returns curve, as a top-level comment suggested, or is it plausible katago could have played better if given 40 seconds per move?

match details: https://gostonebase.com/blog/shin-jinseo-vs-katago-kishin-ma...

Re: Go grandmaster Shin defeats AI KataGo with a two-stone handicap

#58

Post by fn-mote »

prmph wrote: post #45
dlevine wrote: post #4

Apparently 2 stones is a huge advantage. An estimate is that the computer is roughly 4-600 ELO stronger on an even match. Also, the human played a strategy tailored to that huge initial advantage. He said that the AI did not handle this particularly well, and played high probability moves instead of trying to lure him into a mistake. Also, even though this was the best Go engine, it was not running on a supercomputer…

The question of whether machines or humans are stronger is moot, isn't it? In any intellectual contest between human and machine, all the machine winning implies is that the endeavor is algorithmic. The machine can be given practically unlimited memory and compute; we consider it cheating if the human would use memory aids. The machine could be implemented as many agents cooperating; we'd think it's not right if thou…

> not a sign that humans are now stronger than AIs at Go

Totally wrongheaded, actually, since the computer gave the human a 2 stone advantage from the start.

Re: Go grandmaster Shin defeats AI KataGo with a two-stone handicap

#59

Post by fn-mote »

dombiscoff wrote: post #7

What I found interesting was that he adapted and shifted to a very unconventional strategy of play, opposed to the AI who primarily seems to play high probability moves. Does this not demonstrate the human edge against AI in novel / unconventional thinking?

> a very unconventional strategy

Correction: a very conservative strategy, so as not to lose the advantage he started with.

Re: Go grandmaster Shin defeats AI KataGo with a two-stone handicap

#60

Post by andsoitis »

"The 26-year-old South Korean grandmaster became the first human to win an official series against a state-of-the-art Go engine under a two-stone handicap, a margin considered the absolute boundary for human competition against modern AI."

What a powerful story. Humans have a chance of remaining superior because emotions are the fuel for our intellect and wisdom.

Post reply on HN