Hi Nick et al,

The three AlphaZero ganders I enjoy are discussed at


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lFXJWPhDsSY

Deep Mind Alpha Zero's "Immortal Zugzwang Game" against 
Stockfish<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lFXJWPhDsSY>
www.youtube.com
Read more about Deep Mind Alpha Zero here https://arxiv.org/pdf/1712.01815.pdf 
Link to the other games https://lichess.org/study/wxrovYNH A chess game 
betwee...




https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lb3_eRNoH_w

Google Deep Mind AI Alpha Zero Devours 
Stockfish<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lb3_eRNoH_w>
www.youtube.com
Read more about Deep Mind here https://arxiv.org/pdf/1712.01815.pdf Link to the 
other games https://lichess.org/study/wxrovYNH A chess game between Deep M...




https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pcdpgn9OINs

[https://www.bing.com/th?id=OVF.7i%2bi7ksmwRzpI1lsqMzJ%2bQ&pid=Api]<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pcdpgn9OINs>

Deep Mind AI Alpha Zero Dismantles Stockfish's French 
Defense<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pcdpgn9OINs>
www.youtube.com
Check out all my videos on this match 
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLDnx7w_xuguHIxbL7akaYgEvV4spwYkmn Read 
more about Deep Mind Alpha Zero here http...




--John

________________________________
From: Friam <[email protected]> on behalf of Nick Thompson 
<[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, December 11, 2017 11:41:20 PM
To: 'The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group'
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Google self-evolving AlphaZero artificial intelligence 
program mastered chess from scratch in 4 hours: Rich Murray 2017.12.10


John,



Is one of these “exciting” games played through and commented on any engine 
that mere mortals can access?



n



Nicholas S. Thompson

Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology

Clark University

http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/



From: Friam [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of John Kennison
Sent: Monday, December 11, 2017 2:23 PM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Google self-evolving AlphaZero artificial intelligence 
program mastered chess from scratch in 4 hours: Rich Murray 2017.12.10



I agree that it's not clear that AlphaZero would excel at the supergame.I 
described. Still human intuition is probably not the indispensable ingredient 
that it once might have seemed to be.



On the other hand, many chess commentators think that AlphaZero has a playing 
style that is "more human" than the styles of other chess computers. When 
humans play chess, we can often discern themes --maybe one player is trying to 
breakthrough in the center while the other  is trying to breakthrough on a 
flank. In contrast, most computers are simply trying to maximize a position 
evaluation function. This only leads to a successful breakthrough if the 
computer can see in advance that the breakthrough will lead, in a relatively 
short time, to a measurable advantage, such as the forced win of a pawn.



Humans sometimes say that they need a plan -even a bad plan is said to be 
better than playing without a plan. AlphaZero's games against the computer 
Stockfish seem to pursue clear-cut plans (at least the games that have been 
made available). It may be the case that having a plan leads to better play. 
The point is that the plan changes the evaluation function --if you want to 
breakthrough in the center, you try to post your pieces differently than if you 
are planning to breakthrough in a flank. Having a plan, even a bad plan, may 
lead to better coordination of your pieces --even for a computer.



Magnus Carlsen, the current human world chess champion, said that if you play 
against a top computer you will surely lose but you will also be bored. I think 
that you find a game you are watching interesting when you can sense competing 
plans behind the moves. AlphaZero's games are quite exciting.

________________________________

From: Friam <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> on 
behalf of Russ Abbott <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Sent: Monday, December 11, 2017 12:36:53 PM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Google self-evolving AlphaZero artificial intelligence 
program mastered chess from scratch in 4 hours: Rich Murray 2017.12.10



Not clear that AlphaZero would do well on John's SuperGame.  It won on chess 
(and Go) by playing against itself in advance. If it doesn't have the 
opportunity to do that it won't have that advantage. It's strategy would have 
to be something like on-the-fly playing the selected game against itself in the 
background at the same time as it is playing the human opponent. The question 
then is how fast it can teach itself the new game.  It's strategy would have to 
be to slow down the game against the opponent as much as possible to give 
itself time to learn the new game.  So it becomes a matter of computer speed 
(for learning the new game) and the extent to which the real game can be 
delayed as it is in progress.



On Mon, Dec 11, 2017 at 8:58 AM Steven A Smith 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:

Marcus wrote:

Is a strategy anything more than a coarse-grained tactic?   And is intuition 
anything more than an associative memory that connects coarse- and fine- 
grained information?

Is it any more?  Or any less?

Learning is an iterated game that operates at many scales and on many 
dimensions...

<TL;Don'tRead>

The Biological Evolution record shows myriad explosions in quantity and 
diversity  that resulted from a (small? but) significant innovation (e.g. 
multicellular organisms, Eukaryotes, photosynthesis, oxygen metabolisms, 
vertebrae,  warm blooded metabolism, live birth, etc).   Punctuated equilibrium?

There seem to be similar inflection points in the "learning" implied in human 
social/technological/economic evolution and we may be in on the shoulder of 
"yet another" which gestures in the direction of the von 
Nuemann/Vinge/Kurzweillian "technological singularity".

I'm not much of a chess expert, myself, playing only *barely* competitively in 
my late teens (as Spassky and Fischer were dukingit out), and revisiting it in 
the pre-ALife era of "evolution, games, and learning" in the late 80s, along 
with GO.  Chess itself, as a "playing field" for learning strategy is a 
microcosm to observe the general idea of "learning".   The history of chess is 
fascinating.  In the current context, it is fascinating that out of about 1500 
years of existence (in proto-forms), for a little over 500 of it, the rules 
have settled on what we use today, but the tactics and strategies developed *on 
top* of those has continued to  both *evolve* and *reflect* society at large.  
Most notably, perhaps, the "Romantic Period" where one of the dominant ideas 
was that personal genius *and* style mattered more than theory or logic or even 
board positions.   This somewhat reflected the military and political style of 
that period.  During the "age of Enlightenment" it also had a moral 
embedding...  The "modern" era emerged with the industrial revolution and more 
importantly perhaps, the mechanization of war where chess strategy, now 
somewhat more "scientific" began to eventually give rise to "hypermodernism" 
which focus more on controlling the center of the board from afar (a parallel 
to mechanized warfare where power could be projected over a great distance in a 
short amount of time).   Algorithmic play and mathematical analysis has been 
considered since the late Romanitc period but didn't come into it's own  until 
the modern digital computer, with Claude Shannon taking an early swipe at the 
problem as early as 1950!   The fact that it took more than 50 years to get to 
Deep Blue's thin victory over Kasparov is more a testimony to how subtle and 
hard Chess is than how intelligent humans are, etc.

"Deep Learning" itself seems like nothing more (and nothing less) than the 
latest innovation in machine learning (game theory, neural nets, cellular 
automata, genetic algorithms, learning classifiers, etc.) which *could* very 
well portend the breakaway point of the AI-driven technological singularity.  
I'm not THAT up on "Deep Learning" but things like Generative Antagonistic 
Networks (and other unsupervised machine learning) seem to have the key quality 
of not needing supervision by humans to learn...  there may be one more level 
of indirection to be had before things go ape-shit (exponentially speaking)...

 I personally don't imagine that a *single* AI will be the source of this, but 
rather a Cambrian-explosion-like plethora of AI's, though they may be so 
pervasive and promiscuous as to cross-fertilize so thoroughly that they will be 
a single "organism" for all practical purposes.

</TL;DR>

- Steve





From: Friam [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of John Kennison
Sent: Monday, December 11, 2017 7:17 AM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group 
<[email protected]><mailto:[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Google self-evolving AlphaZero artificial intelligence 
program mastered chess from scratch in 4 hours: Rich Murray 2017.12.10



I once thought I had a sure-fire way to make games between humans and computers 
fairer. Start with a large set of chess-like games that use different boards, 
different pieces, different rules. Enumerate the games so that each one 
corresponds to a n-digit binary numeral (for large n). Then make a "super game" 
in which the players start by creating a n digit binary numeral by taking turns 
in which they can specify one of the n binary digits. The super game would 
continue by playing the chess-like game that corresponds to the created number.



In a super game between a human and a computer, the computer would not have 
access to all the insights into the nature of chess that humans have 
established over hundreds of years of playing chess and which chess playing 
computers use to defeat humans.  Of course, the human player would also be 
deprived of all the years of research into chess, but humans can use their 
marvelous intuition to figure out a reasonable set of strategies even for a 
game they haven't studied before. The computer, without a reasonable set of 
strategies, would (I assumed) find little benefit from  its massive computing 
power.



The new AlphaZero game playing computer refutes my idea.



________________________________

From: Friam <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> on 
behalf of Rich Murray <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Sent: Monday, December 11, 2017 12:16:26 AM
To: Rich Murray
Subject: [FRIAM] Google self-evolving AlphaZero artificial intelligence program 
mastered chess from scratch in 4 hours: Rich Murray 2017.12.10







https://futurism.com/4-hours-googles-ai-mastered-chess-knowledge-history/



Chess isn’t an easy game, by human standards. But for an artificial 
intelligence powered by a formidable, almost alien mindset, the trivial 
diversion can be mastered in a few spare hours.



In a new paper, Google researchers detail how their latest AI evolution, 
AlphaZero, developed “superhuman performance” in chess, taking just four hours 
to learn the rules before obliterating the world champion chess program, 
Stockfish.



In other words, all of humanity’s chess knowledge – and beyond – was absorbed 
and surpassed by an AI in about as long as it takes to drive from New York City 
to Washington, DC.



After being programmed with only the rules of chess (no strategies), in just 
four hours AlphaZero had mastered the game to the extent it was able to best 
the highest-rated chess-playing program Stockfish.



In a series of 100 games against Stockfish, AlphaZero won 25 games while 
playing as white (with first mover advantage), and picked up three games 
playing as black.

The rest of the contests were draws, with Stockfish recording no wins and 
AlphaZero no losses.



[https://ipmcdn.avast.com/images/icons/icon-envelope-tick-round-orange-animated-no-repeat-v1.gif]<https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail&utm_term=icon>


Virus-free. 
www.avast.com<https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail&utm_term=link>






============================================================

FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv

Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College

to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com

FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove



============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

--

Russ Abbott

Professor, Computer Science

California State University, Los Angeles
============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

Reply via email to