TalkChess.com

Laskos wrote:

Michel wrote:Only by 0.5 point if I understood correctly. On the other hand AlphaGo is programmed to go for the surest win and not the win that delivers the most points (which may involve taking higher risks). So the fact that AlphaGo "only" won by 0.5 points may be misleading.

0.5 without komi of 7.5? That was my impression, but I don't know how to count very well. From what I understood, Ke Jie tried to gain points, so that Alpha would need to attack, but mishandled the opening and in fact after the opening Alpha had more (potential) points and Ke had to attack. There was no opportunity to attack Alpha in the whole game, and Alpha, gaining advantage from the opening, just played quietly for the win. Alpha still seems to go to the highest probability, not highest advantage, so potentially it may had 10-15 stones advantage in late midgame, but went for the safer 6-8 points. I will maybe post Crazy Stone Deep Learning (7 amateusr dan) 2 hour analysis, that shows that from this engine (Zenith 6 too) point of view, White (Alpha) had substantial advantage right from the opening after move 20, a thing which seems to be overlooked or muted by 9p pros commenting. It seems that even relatively weak engines compared to those pros (3-4 stones difference) are better at scoring in the initial stages of the game.

Ke here seems to have had no any chances, a pretty overwhelming win by Alphago.

duncan wrote:

Laskos wrote:

Michel wrote:Only by 0.5 point if I understood correctly. On the other hand AlphaGo is programmed to go for the surest win and not the win that delivers the most points (which may involve taking higher risks). So the fact that AlphaGo "only" won by 0.5 points may be misleading.

0.5 without komi of 7.5? That was my impression, but I don't know how to count very well. From what I understood, Ke Jie tried to gain points, so that Alpha would need to attack, but mishandled the opening and in fact after the opening Alpha had more (potential) points and Ke had to attack. There was no opportunity to attack Alpha in the whole game, and Alpha, gaining advantage from the opening, just played quietly for the win. Alpha still seems to go to the highest probability, not highest advantage, so potentially it may had 10-15 stones advantage in late midgame, but went for the safer 6-8 points. I will maybe post Crazy Stone Deep Learning (7 amateusr dan) 2 hour analysis, that shows that from this engine (Zenith 6 too) point of view, White (Alpha) had substantial advantage right from the opening after move 20, a thing which seems to be overlooked or muted by 9p pros commenting. It seems that even relatively weak engines compared to those pros (3-4 stones difference) are better at scoring in the initial stages of the game.

Ke here seems to have had no any chances, a pretty overwhelming win by Alphago.

thanks for the analysis. keep it going!


with chess most (although not all) experts seem to be saying even with a 32 piece database, a computer with knight handicap would not be able to defeat a grandmaster.

do you have an opinion what handicap would be needed for a 9 dan go player to defeat a computer with access to a solved database of go.?

lkaufman wrote:

Dirt wrote:The match is now scheduled to take place from May 23 to May 27 of 2017. Only three games are in the main match but there will also be matches between professionals alternating moves with computers as well as other activities.

Yes, it starts tonite U.S. time. Michael Redmond 9 Dan pro estimates a 10% chance of the pro winning even 1 game. He thought that a 2 stone handicap would be fair, but "politically incorrect".
By a curious coincidence (?) just last week the top Shogi engines defeated the World Champion ("Meijin" to be exact) Sato 2 to 0 in comparably serious games, and they weren't even close; my judgment as an amateur 5 Dan is that the engine could easily give a Lance handicap to any human and expect to win So assuming that the computer wins this Go match, Go will have lasted one week longer than Shogi before having fallen to the computers!

duncan wrote:with chess most (although not all) experts seem to be saying even with a 32 piece database, a computer with knight handicap would not be able to defeat a grandmaster.

do you have an opinion what handicap would be needed for a 9 dan go player to defeat a computer with access to a solved database of go.?

Laskos wrote:This thing which destroyed Ke Jie runs on a machine 10 times smaller than that against Lee Sedol, a large single machine with like 4 GPU. I would dare to say that AlphaGo on home PC is stronger than top Go pros. A remarkable achievement. They also have new approaches built in, ready to be published in "Nature" after the match. I guess in 3-4 years we will have Go on Smartphone beating top Go players. Outstanding progress, this seemed very far away only 2 years ago.

Milos wrote:

Laskos wrote:This thing which destroyed Ke Jie runs on a machine 10 times smaller than that against Lee Sedol, a large single machine with like 4 GPU. I would dare to say that AlphaGo on home PC is stronger than top Go pros. A remarkable achievement. They also have new approaches built in, ready to be published in "Nature" after the match. I guess in 3-4 years we will have Go on Smartphone beating top Go players. Outstanding progress, this seemed very far away only 2 years ago.

I wouldn't be so sure about that. The difference between Titan Xp and Adreno 540 is far greater than difference between i7-6950X and Snapdragon 835.

Laskos wrote:

Milos wrote:

Laskos wrote:This thing which destroyed Ke Jie runs on a machine 10 times smaller than that against Lee Sedol, a large single machine with like 4 GPU. I would dare to say that AlphaGo on home PC is stronger than top Go pros. A remarkable achievement. They also have new approaches built in, ready to be published in "Nature" after the match. I guess in 3-4 years we will have Go on Smartphone beating top Go players. Outstanding progress, this seemed very far away only 2 years ago.

I wouldn't be so sure about that. The difference between Titan Xp and Adreno 540 is far greater than difference between i7-6950X and Snapdragon 835.

In many benchamrks the latest Samsungs are only 5 time slower than a fully equipped Intel 7700K. The progress in Go was 2000+ ELO points in the last 1.5 years. Add another 1000 in 3-4 years and some moderate progress of Samsung, and you are there. Let's see, but I cannot wait to buy the new Zen for PC, or even better, AlphaGo if they make it commercial. I already bought a strong Nvidia card. Stupid hobbies, as a player I am a patzer in everything .

Milos wrote:

Laskos wrote:

Milos wrote:

Laskos wrote:This thing which destroyed Ke Jie runs on a machine 10 times smaller than that against Lee Sedol, a large single machine with like 4 GPU. I would dare to say that AlphaGo on home PC is stronger than top Go pros. A remarkable achievement. They also have new approaches built in, ready to be published in "Nature" after the match. I guess in 3-4 years we will have Go on Smartphone beating top Go players. Outstanding progress, this seemed very far away only 2 years ago.

I wouldn't be so sure about that. The difference between Titan Xp and Adreno 540 is far greater than difference between i7-6950X and Snapdragon 835.

In many benchamrks the latest Samsungs are only 5 time slower than a fully equipped Intel 7700K. The progress in Go was 2000+ ELO points in the last 1.5 years. Add another 1000 in 3-4 years and some moderate progress of Samsung, and you are there. Let's see, but I cannot wait to buy the new Zen for PC, or even better, AlphaGo if they make it commercial. I already bought a strong Nvidia card. Stupid hobbies, as a player I am a patzer in everything .

As I said i7-6950X vs Snapdragom 835 is like 5x for chess (SF benchmark).
However TitanXp is 30x compared to Adreno 540 and that's in games, and in actual ML difference is easily 50x. And AlphaGo hardware atm has 4 TitanXp's. That's close to 200x and AlphaGo strength lies almost exclusively in GPU power.

duncan wrote:

Laskos wrote:

Michel wrote:Only by 0.5 point if I understood correctly. On the other hand AlphaGo is programmed to go for the surest win and not the win that delivers the most points (which may involve taking higher risks). So the fact that AlphaGo "only" won by 0.5 points may be misleading.

0.5 without komi of 7.5? That was my impression, but I don't know how to count very well. From what I understood, Ke Jie tried to gain points, so that Alpha would need to attack, but mishandled the opening and in fact after the opening Alpha had more (potential) points and Ke had to attack. There was no opportunity to attack Alpha in the whole game, and Alpha, gaining advantage from the opening, just played quietly for the win. Alpha still seems to go to the highest probability, not highest advantage, so potentially it may had 10-15 stones advantage in late midgame, but went for the safer 6-8 points. I will maybe post Crazy Stone Deep Learning (7 amateusr dan) 2 hour analysis, that shows that from this engine (Zenith 6 too) point of view, White (Alpha) had substantial advantage right from the opening after move 20, a thing which seems to be overlooked or muted by 9p pros commenting. It seems that even relatively weak engines compared to those pros (3-4 stones difference) are better at scoring in the initial stages of the game.

Ke here seems to have had no any chances, a pretty overwhelming win by Alphago.

thanks for the analysis. keep it going!


with chess most (although not all) experts seem to be saying even with a 32 piece database, a computer with knight handicap would not be able to defeat a grandmaster.

do you have an opinion what handicap would be needed for a 9 dan go player to defeat a computer with access to a solved database of go.?

Leto wrote:

duncan wrote:

Laskos wrote:

Michel wrote:Only by 0.5 point if I understood correctly. On the other hand AlphaGo is programmed to go for the surest win and not the win that delivers the most points (which may involve taking higher risks). So the fact that AlphaGo "only" won by 0.5 points may be misleading.

0.5 without komi of 7.5? That was my impression, but I don't know how to count very well. From what I understood, Ke Jie tried to gain points, so that Alpha would need to attack, but mishandled the opening and in fact after the opening Alpha had more (potential) points and Ke had to attack. There was no opportunity to attack Alpha in the whole game, and Alpha, gaining advantage from the opening, just played quietly for the win. Alpha still seems to go to the highest probability, not highest advantage, so potentially it may had 10-15 stones advantage in late midgame, but went for the safer 6-8 points. I will maybe post Crazy Stone Deep Learning (7 amateusr dan) 2 hour analysis, that shows that from this engine (Zenith 6 too) point of view, White (Alpha) had substantial advantage right from the opening after move 20, a thing which seems to be overlooked or muted by 9p pros commenting. It seems that even relatively weak engines compared to those pros (3-4 stones difference) are better at scoring in the initial stages of the game.

Ke here seems to have had no any chances, a pretty overwhelming win by Alphago.

thanks for the analysis. keep it going!


with chess most (although not all) experts seem to be saying even with a 32 piece database, a computer with knight handicap would not be able to defeat a grandmaster.

do you have an opinion what handicap would be needed for a 9 dan go player to defeat a computer with access to a solved database of go.?

Are you sure about your knight odds comment? It seems Larry Kaufman said earlier this year that Komodo already plays about equal with a few grandmasters at knight odds in blitz. Here's where I found his statement:
http://talkchess.com/forum/viewtopic.ph ... night+odds

Seems to me that it's only a matter of time before engines can beat grandmasters at knight odds in long time control games.