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

AlphaGo beats Lee Sedol again in match 2 of 5

gogameguru.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 576 posts

Re: AlphaGo beats Lee Sedol again in match 2 of 5

#71

Post by igravious »

forgotpwtomain wrote: post #57
i_don_t_know wrote: post #42

Is there a complete recording of the commentary? They had one for game 1. The current live stream only goes back two hours and doesn't include the beginning of the game. I'm looking at the DeepMind channel on Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCP7jMXSY2xbc3KCAE0MHQ-A

I tried to watch commentary on the DeepMind channel for game #1 and found it to be very un-informative: I recommend the AGA channel (although it's been linked a few times): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ZugVil2v4w , still waiting on the game 2 static video.

I disagree.

Last night I found that on the DeepMind channel they were explaining the game a lot for beginners. This was a bit tedious for me but then this is a historic event so there'll be noobs tuning in so I can understand that, and I appreciate that the TV people are thinking of them.

Also, the AGA channel you just seem to have a split screen showing two people with headphones on talking over Skype? (Granted, one of them is Myungwan Kim, 9p, a super likeable guy - but Michael Redmond, 9p, is also super likeable.) The DeepMind channel switches between the game board and the large commentary board, with occasional shots of Lee Sedol and occasional shots of the DeepMind terminal.

Michael Redmond was reading out lots of variations and repeatedly trying to count the board and evaluate the position. I think he was trying to be as informative as he could. Occasionally he would get lost in thought as he calculated owing to the complexity. You could call it many things but uninformative is not one of them.

edit: added pro commentators names...

Re: AlphaGo beats Lee Sedol again in match 2 of 5

#72

Post by kqr »

ljk wrote: post #19
mixedmath wrote: post #9

This game was largely played extremely well by both sides. There were a a few peculiar-seeming moves made by AlphaGo that the commentator found very atypical. These moves ended up playing a very important role in the end game. I should also say that it's somewhat clear that Sedol made one suboptimal move, and AlphaGo capitalized on it. Interestingly, the English commentator made the same mistake as he was predicting…

> These moves ended up playing a very important role in the end game. Does this mean AlphaGo was playing at a higher level or is it just a coincident?

Impossible for anyone of us to know. The Google people might know, but it's in there interest to not present AlphaGo as clearly superior because an even game attracts more views.

Re: AlphaGo beats Lee Sedol again in match 2 of 5

#73

Post by sidko »

imron wrote: post #62
Florin_Andrei wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There were a a few peculiar-seeming moves made by AlphaGo that the commentator found very atypical. Myungwan Kim 9-dan professional (comments on match #1): "She knows everything [...] Unthinkable move for human [...] AlphaGo plays like the god of go" https://youtu.be/6ZugVil2v4w?t=5054

I wonder how long before humans start learning from AlphaGo! I want to see AlphaGo vs AlphaGo :-)

Seeing the way chess computers have evolved, this won't be far into the future. There are several tournaments just for chess computers, and it is very hard even for grandmasters to follow every more. Somehow, after a 20-move sequence that appears to accomplish nothing, one side is slightly up, and the rest of the game is decided.

Re: AlphaGo beats Lee Sedol again in match 2 of 5

#74

Post by ramidarigaz »

bronz wrote: post #55

Who was the GO professional commentator? He was consistently predicting the moves of both Sedol and alphago. I was extremely impressed.

Michael Redmond. I thought he was excellent too, and I really liked his willingness to jump into hypothetical situations and play it out. Really, really good commentator.

Re: AlphaGo beats Lee Sedol again in match 2 of 5

#75

Post by javajosh »

bradley_long wrote: post #35

Human can become tired, emotional and nervous. However, a computer/ software would not have these problems. Especially for Lee, the whole world is looking at him. An "ordinary" human like me won't be able to make the right decisions under this pressure. A great respect to Lee and the Developers of AlphaGo. Good Game!

To address this, has anyone considered pitting AlphaGo against a team of 9p players consulting with each other, and perhaps taking charge of different conflicts on the board?

Re: AlphaGo beats Lee Sedol again in match 2 of 5

#76

Post by kqr »

skc wrote: post #49

I find it very interesting that to a layperson, the idea of a computer being able to beat a human at a logic game is pretty much expected and uninteresting. You try and share this story with a non-technical person and they will likely say "Well, duh..it's a computer".

Pitch it as a creativity game rather than a logic game. I mean, it's a little bit of both, right?

Re: AlphaGo beats Lee Sedol again in match 2 of 5

#77

Post by kqr »

javajosh wrote: post #75
bradley_long wrote: post #35

Human can become tired, emotional and nervous. However, a computer/ software would not have these problems. Especially for Lee, the whole world is looking at him. An "ordinary" human like me won't be able to make the right decisions under this pressure. A great respect to Lee and the Developers of AlphaGo. Good Game!

To address this, has anyone considered pitting AlphaGo against a team of 9p players consulting with each other, and perhaps taking charge of different conflicts on the board?

I can't find the source now, but I remember reading a while ago that a team of go players is, perhaps contrary to intuition, not significantly better than their strongest individual alone.

There's just no useful way to "pool" human thinking power and redistribute it to where it's needed the most – all the players will simultaneously consider the same branches. At best you reduce the risk of making a silly mistake, but sitting pros are already pretty good at that.

Re: AlphaGo beats Lee Sedol again in match 2 of 5

#78

Post by Jach »

jknz wrote: post #18

The next person that will beat alphaGo may not be a top go player. In particular, I'm wondering if a computer scientist with access to the alphaGo source code and all the weights of the network could trick alphaGo in order to win games automatically (cf. the papers that show a neural net can be tricked to classify a plane as any other class). If a human with the knowledge of the source code and the weights can do thi…

I had this conversation earlier with a friend wondering if any of Sedol's Korean pro buddies have noticed any systematic biases that could be exploited. I think it would be possible to make the neural net relatively useless by playing strange sequences that hack the weights, but you're still left with a monte-carlo-tree-search bot which alone depending on its implementation is between 2d and 6d amateur (so on the far weaker side of the professional scale). Whether you could make those strange sequences to trick the neural net while also not dying to MCTS, I'm skeptical.

I'm kind of hoping for an unconventional opening in game #3. Come on tengen or 5,5... Additionally I think that might be one way of weakening the bot in that it will find its net for suggesting candidate moves less useful and lean more on unguided MCTS, but that's just a wild guess.

Re: AlphaGo beats Lee Sedol again in match 2 of 5

#79

Post by kqr »

brianchu wrote: post #37

I'm totally uninformed about Go, but by now it seems that unless you're clearly in the lead by the end of the midgame, AlphaGo is going to win, simply because at that point its Monte Carlo Tree Search is going to our-compute you in examining all the tactical variations in the endgame. Lee Sedol really seemed to be under a lot of time pressure at the end. EDIT: clarified to what I originally meant: "end of midgame"

In the mid-game – and hell, even in the early end-game – the search space is still too big to practically exhaust the useful branches with MCTS. Keep in mind "mid-game" in Go means there's still over 100 moves left in the game – well longer than a full chess game.

I'm not saying you're wrong, I'm just saying I don't agree with your motivation.

Re: AlphaGo beats Lee Sedol again in match 2 of 5

#80

Post by forgotpwtomain »

igravious wrote: post #71
forgotpwtomain wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I tried to watch commentary on the DeepMind channel for game #1 and found it to be very un-informative: I recommend the AGA channel (although it's been linked a few times): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ZugVil2v4w , still waiting on the game 2 static video.

I disagree. Last night I found that on the DeepMind channel they were explaining the game a lot for beginners. This was a bit tedious for me but then this is a historic event so there'll be noobs tuning in so I can understand that, and I appreciate that the TV people are thinking of them. Also, the AGA channel you just seem to have a split screen showing two people with headphones on talking over Skype? (Granted, one…

> Last night I found that on the DeepMind channel they were explaining the game a lot for beginners.

Yeah, I think I caught some 15 minutes of this and stopped watching, maybe it got better later? I would have expected them to the introduction for beginners before the start of the real game, and they ended up skipping commentary on what seemed like pretty key choice in the early game to do so.

> Also, the AGA channel you just seem to have a split screen showing two people with headphones on talking over Skype? (Granted, one of them is Myungwan Kim, 9p, a super likeable guy - but Michael Redmond, 9p, is also super likeable.)

There were even some technical difficulties with the skype feed on a few occasions and I wouldn't call it great quality, but on the other hand I rather prefer the KGS virtual board - on which it's quicker to show the possible alternatives and easier to point out the key stones.

Post reply on HN