But at the start of the game the statistical learning of infinitessimal
advantages of one opening move compared to another opening move is less
efficient than the learning done in the middle and end game.
On Thu, 10 Mar 2016, Sorin Gherman wrote:
From reading their article, AlphaGo makes no difference at all between start,
middle and endgame.
Just like any other position, the empty (or almost empty, or almost full) board
is just another game position in which it chooses (one of) the most
promising moves in order to maximize her chance of winning.
On Mar 10, 2016 12:31 PM, "uurtamo ." <uurt...@gmail.com> wrote:
Quick question - how, mechanically, is the opening being handled by alpha
go and other recent very strong programs? Giant hand-entered or
game-learned joseki books?
Thanks,
steve
On Mar 10, 2016 12:23 PM, "Thomas Wolf" <tw...@brocku.ca> wrote:
My 2 cent:
Recent strong computer programs never loose by a few points. They
are either
crashed before the end game starts (because when being clearly
behind they play more
desperate and weaker moves because they mainly get negative
feadback from
their search with mostly loosing branches and risky play gives them
the only
winning sequences in their search) or they win by resignation or win
by a few points.
In other words, if a human player playing AlphaGo does not have a
large
advantage already in the middle game, then AlphaGo will win whether
it looks
like it or not (even to a 9p player like Michael Redmond was
surprised
last night about the sudden gain of a number of points by AlphaGo
in the
center in the end game: 4:42:10, 4:43:00, 4:43:28 in the video
https://gogameguru.com/alphago-2/)
In the middle and end game the reduced number of possible moves and
the
precise and fast counting ability of computer programs are
superior. In the
game commentary of the 1st game it was mentioned that Lee Sedol
considers the
opening not to be his strongest part of the game. But with AlphaGo
playing
top pro level even in the opening, a large advantage after the
middle game
might simply be impossible to reach for a human.
About finding weakness:
In the absense of games of AlphaGo to study it might be interesting
to get a general idea by checking out the games where 7d Zen
lost on KGS
recently.
Thomas
On Thu, 10 Mar 2016, wing wrote:
One question is whether Lee Sedol knows about these
weaknesses.
Another question is whether he will exploit those weaknesses.
Lee has a very simple style of play that seems less
ko-oriented
than other players, and this may play into the hands of Alpha.
Michael Wing
I was surprised the Lee Sedol didn't take the game a
bit further to
probe AlphaGo and see how it responded to [...complex
kos, complex ko
fights, complex sekis, complex semeais, ..., multiple
connection
problems, complex life and death problems] as
ammunition for his next
game. I think he was so astonished at being put into a
losing
position, he wasn't mentally prepared to put himself
in a student's
role again, especially to an AI...which had clearly
played much weaker
games just 6 months ago. I'm hopeful Lee Sedol's team
has been some
meta-strategy sessions where, if he finds himself in a
losing position
in game two, he turns it into exploring a set of
experiments to tease
out some of the weaknesses to be better exploited in
the remaining
games.
On Thu, Mar 10, 2016 at 8:16 AM, Robert Jasiek
<jas...@snafu.de> wrote:
> On 10.03.2016 00:45, Hideki Kato wrote:
> > > such as solving complex semeai's and
double-ko's, aren't solved yet.
> > To find out Alphago's weaknesses, there can be, in
particular,
> > - this match
> - careful analysis of its games
> - Alphago playing on artificial problem positions incl.
complex kos, > complex ko fights, complex
sekis, complex semeais, complex endgames, > multiple
connection problems, complex life and death
problems (such as > Igo Hatsu Yoron 120) etc., and
then theoretical analysis of such play
> - semantic verification of the program code and
interface
> - theoretical study of the used theory and the
generated dynamic data > (structures)
> > --
> robert jasiek
> _______________________________________________
> Computer-go mailing list
> Computer-go@computer-go.org
> http://computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go
[1]
Links:
------
[1] http://computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go
_______________________________________________
Computer-go mailing list
Computer-go@computer-go.org
http://computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go
_______________________________________________
Computer-go mailing list
Computer-go@computer-go.org
http://computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go
_______________________________________________
Computer-go mailing list
Computer-go@computer-go.org
http://computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go
_______________________________________________
Computer-go mailing list
Computer-go@computer-go.org
http://computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go
_______________________________________________
Computer-go mailing list
Computer-go@computer-go.org
http://computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go
