On 23.10.2017 19:15, Xavier Combelle wrote:
[personal attack deleted]
Did you already encounter a real game with "disturbing life kos or
anti-sekis" and especially "ladders (...) beyond 250 moves" ? If not how
do you believe that Alphago would learn how to manage such situations.
Dave Dyer
David Ongaro and Xavier Combelle,
I am respectfully requesting you stop inappropriately discussing and
addressing the person Robert Jasiek in your posts. He has not acted in any
way inappropriate on this list (I fully read every post). Therefore he
hasn't done anything which needs to be addressed
On 2017-10-23 at 23:56, Thomas Rohde wrote:
> On 2017-10-23 at 19:15, Xavier Combelle wrote:
>
> > Hi Robert Jasiek,
> >
> > you might have a delusional way to see the game of go and life,
>
> this is quite an insult
Do you consider Robert's style of discussion "kind"? I for my part do
not.
On 24.10.2017 11:45, David Ongaro wrote:
very seldom saw a discussion with Robert lead to anything.
(You seem to only refer to discussion on this mailing list.)
Apart from this being a discussion about one particular person, let me
ignore this for a moment:
In the current time, computer-go
Le 24/10/2017 à 14:35, Robert Jasiek a écrit :
> On 24.10.2017 11:45, David Ongaro wrote:
>> very seldom saw a discussion with Robert lead to anything.
>
> (You seem to only refer to discussion on this mailing list.)
>
> Apart from this being a discussion about one particular person, let me
>
On 24.10.2017 16:45, Xavier Combelle wrote:
I don't understand what you mean by go-theorical aspects.
Go theory is an ambiguous term and means everything from informal
("Starting with a standard corner move can't be wrong.") via principle
("Usually, defend a weak important group.") to formal
"In the current time, computer-go discussion and research has a very
high percentage of people discussing the side of mainly programs and
programming but I belong to the very low percentage of people
discussing mainly go-theoretical aspects of computer-go. With a higher
percentage of the latter,
David Silver told Master used 40 layers network in May.
According to new paper, Master used the same architecture
as Zero. So, Master used 20 blocks ResNet.
The first instance of Zero, 20 blocks ResNet version, is
weaker than Master (after 3 days training). So, with the
same layers (a
On 23-10-17 10:39, Darren Cook wrote:
>> The source of AlphaGo Zero is really of zero interest (pun intended).
>
> The source code is the first-hand account of how it works, whereas an
> academic paper is a second-hand account. So, definitely not zero use.
This should be fairly accurate:
Could we PLEASE take this off-list? If you don't like someone, or what
they post, filter them. If you think someone should be banned, present
your case to the list owner(s).
Darren
___
Computer-go mailing list
Computer-go@computer-go.org
On 24.10.2017 20:19, Xavier Combelle wrote:
totally unrelated
No, because a) software must also be evaluated and can by go theory and
b) software can be built on exact go theory. That currently (b) is
unpopular does not mean unrelated.
--
robert jasiek
Are you thinking the 1st instance could reach Master level
if giving more training days?
I don't think so. The performance would be stopping
improving at 3 days. If not, why they built the 2nd
instance?
Best,
Hideki
Xavier Combelle: <05c04de1-59c4-8fcd-2dd1-094faabf3...@gmail.com>:
>How is
And while what you say is true (when I was a kid they did not say I had
Aspergers Syndrome but rather called me hyperactive when they chose my meds),
in this case I believe that it is magnified by, I am guessing here, one is
German the other is French, and they are typing in English … a
Gian-Carlo, I didn't realize at first that you were planning to create a
crowd-sourced project. I hope this project can get off the ground and
running!
I'll look into installing this but I always find it hard to get all the
tool chain stuff going.
2017-10-24 15:02 GMT-05:00 Gian-Carlo Pascutto
We're suffering under the burden of so much success from other methods that
it's hard for many people to imagine that anything else is worth
considering.
Of course this is not true.
Tromp's enumerations are particularly enjoyable for me.
Human-built decision trees have been so unsuccessful,
Here’s a quick test:
1. Are you a software engineer?
2. If you answered “Yes” to question 1, congratulations, you have Aspergers. If
you answered no to question 1, but you’re participating in an electronic
discussion, you might as well have Aspergers, because e-media cannot convey
tone or
Also (if I'm understanding the paper correctly) 20 blocks ~= 40 layers
because each "block" has two convolution layers:
Each residual block applies the following modules sequentially to its input:
> (1) A convolution of 256 filters of kernel size 3×3 with stride 1
> (2) Batch normalization
> (3)
How is it a fair comparison if there is only 3 days of training for Zero ?
Master had longer training no ? Moreover, Zero has bootstrap problem
because at the opposite of Master it don't learn from expert games
which means that it is likely to be weaker with little training.
Le 24/10/2017 à
18 matches
Mail list logo
