In Two Moves, AlphaGo and Lee Sedol Redefined the Future (2016)
1–10 of 24 posts
Re: In Two Moves, AlphaGo and Lee Sedol Redefined the Future (2016)
#2Re: In Two Moves, AlphaGo and Lee Sedol Redefined the Future (2016)
#3Interesting that Lee Sedol losing at Go was the big opening act in the modern AI wave, but it ended up coming from a completely different technology that has effectively faded into the background.
Re: In Two Moves, AlphaGo and Lee Sedol Redefined the Future (2016)
#4Well, Bridge remains unconquered, although it is unclear whether it is because of disinterest or incapability. As I have highlighted before, the day a computer false-cards will be the day.
(False-carding - playing a certain card with the primary intention of deceiving the opponents and forcing an error)
Re: In Two Moves, AlphaGo and Lee Sedol Redefined the Future (2016)
#5Interesting that Lee Sedol losing at Go was the big opening act in the modern AI wave, but it ended up coming from a completely different technology that has effectively faded into the background.
how so?
modern post-training uses RL and immense amounts of synthetic data to iteratively bootstrap better performance. if you squint this is extremely similar to the AlphaZero approach of iteratively training using RL over data generated through self-play
Re: In Two Moves, AlphaGo and Lee Sedol Redefined the Future (2016)
#6Coincidentally, I just watched the hour long documentary that DeepMind made about the match [1]. It talks a lot about the two moves - though not really in detail.
To a non-go player like myself, both moves 37 and 78 seemed completely arbitrary. I mean, much of the video talks about how it's impossible to calculate all the future moves like in chess, yet move 37 of a possible ~300 move game is called out as genius, and move 78 is a God Hand.
For the layman like myself, it seemed a bit inconsistent.
The thing that made me smile was how history repeated itself. Sedol predicted a 5-0 win against the program. Kasparov was pretty cocky as well in the 1990s. You'd think someone would have warned him! "Hey Sedol. Cool your jets, these guys wouldn't be spending so much money just to embarrass themselves."
DeepMind was definitely way more polite than IBM, so that was good to see. The Deep Blue team were sorta jerks to Gary.
Re: In Two Moves, AlphaGo and Lee Sedol Redefined the Future (2016)
#7Interesting that Lee Sedol losing at Go was the big opening act in the modern AI wave, but it ended up coming from a completely different technology that has effectively faded into the background.
> completely different technology that has effectively faded into the background.
If by that you mean reinforcement learning, that's not the case; e.g. see https://arxiv.org/abs/2501.12948
Re: In Two Moves, AlphaGo and Lee Sedol Redefined the Future (2016)
#8Well, Bridge remains unconquered, although it is unclear whether it is because of disinterest or incapability. As I have highlighted before, the day a computer false-cards will be the day. (False-carding - playing a certain card with the primary intention of deceiving the opponents and forcing an error)
How about the slightly easier* Poker? OpenAI seem to be mildly interested
https://xcancel.com/polynoamial?lang=en
https://arxiv.org/abs/2301.09159
(To be fair, re (card) games: I'm also only interested in seeing Cyborg-on-Cyborg action. Lee vs a-G almost qualified :)
Re: In Two Moves, AlphaGo and Lee Sedol Redefined the Future (2016)
#9Interesting that Lee Sedol losing at Go was the big opening act in the modern AI wave, but it ended up coming from a completely different technology that has effectively faded into the background.
They used deep neural networks, reinforcement learning, and Monte Carlo tree search. All except the MCTS are critical components of modern LLMs. MCTS is a form of planning which you can argue has parallels to "reasoning" models, although that's pretty tenuous I admit.
Re: In Two Moves, AlphaGo and Lee Sedol Redefined the Future (2016)
#10Coincidentally, I just watched the hour long documentary that DeepMind made about the match [1]. It talks a lot about the two moves - though not really in detail. To a non-go player like myself, both moves 37 and 78 seemed completely arbitrary. I mean, much of the video talks about how it's impossible to calculate all the future moves like in chess, yet move 37 of a possible ~300 move game is called out as genius, an…
> I mean, much of the video talks about how it's impossible to calculate all the future moves like in chess, yet move 37 of a possible ~300 move game is called out as genius, and move 78 is a God Hand.
Every move is a choice of ~300 possibilities, and you need to calculate far ahead to know if it's a good move or not, so the number of choices you have to explore is much greater than what it seems.