No one really knows how the most advanced algorithms work
Moderators: hgm, Rebel, chrisw
-
- Posts: 2204
- Joined: Sat Jan 18, 2014 10:24 am
- Location: Andorra
-
- Posts: 3226
- Joined: Wed May 06, 2009 10:31 pm
- Location: Fuquay-Varina, North Carolina
Re: No one really knows how the most advanced algorithms wor
Thanks for the link!
-
- Posts: 7218
- Joined: Mon May 27, 2013 10:31 am
Re: No one really knows how the most advanced algorithms wor
Neural Networks are black boxes. That's why you should not use them.
-
- Posts: 13447
- Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 9:02 pm
- Location: Dallas, Texas
- Full name: Matthew Hull
Re: No one really knows how the most advanced algorithms wor
This has been an issue from the very beginning with respect to artificial neural networks. They find patterns in training data but the programmer doesn't necessarily have any idea what the salient features of the training data are (or the useless features). This is less true of small networks but large, sophisticated NNs can be intractable for the programmer.
I still have a working copy of BrainMaker 2.0 for DOS from 1989.
https://calsci.com/BrainIndex.html
Matthew Hull
-
- Posts: 179
- Joined: Fri Feb 14, 2014 10:53 pm
- Location: the Netherlands
Re: No one really knows how the most advanced algorithms wor
Except for me! (But I don't know why)
-
- Posts: 4366
- Joined: Fri Mar 10, 2006 5:23 am
- Location: http://www.arasanchess.org
Re: No one really knows how the most advanced algorithms wor
As Arthur C. Clarke said, "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic."
--Jon
--Jon
-
- Posts: 565
- Joined: Thu Nov 13, 2014 12:03 pm
Re: No one really knows how the most advanced algorithms wor
Yeah.. this is a bit counter-intuituve. One would say "the programmer knows it all", but the concept of training set makes stuff quite murky, as the algorithm calibrates in its own way.
Still, it also happens in heuristic chess engines. Do we really know why they choose this or that move?
Still, it also happens in heuristic chess engines. Do we really know why they choose this or that move?
-
- Posts: 2204
- Joined: Sat Jan 18, 2014 10:24 am
- Location: Andorra
Re: No one really knows how the most advanced algorithms wor
Only to a point, as most changes we try don't work.whereagles wrote: Still, it also happens in heuristic chess engines. Do we really know why they choose this or that move?
Daniel José - http://www.andscacs.com
-
- Posts: 2526
- Joined: Mon Feb 08, 2016 12:43 am
- Full name: Brendan J Norman
Re: No one really knows how the most advanced algorithms wor
Says the guy with a 3200ELO monster as his creation.cdani wrote:Only to a point, as most changes we try don't work.whereagles wrote: Still, it also happens in heuristic chess engines. Do we really know why they choose this or that move?
-
- Posts: 179
- Joined: Fri Feb 14, 2014 10:53 pm
- Location: the Netherlands
Re: No one really knows how the most advanced algorithms wor
Indeed. With feedback in a complex system you often get a chaotic system where the programmer knows for example the formula of a fractal, or a limited set of laws of physics but the results are a practically infinite complexity fractal, or universe.whereagles wrote:Yeah.. this is a bit counter-intuituve. One would say "the programmer knows it all", but the concept of training set makes stuff quite murky, as the algorithm calibrates in its own way.
Still, it also happens in heuristic chess engines. Do we really know why they choose this or that move?
Strangely not so easy to apply to chess. Because of it's tactical nature? Though it should only be a matter of time before pattern recognition becomes useful in computerchess now. I fool around with it from time to time where the idea ofcourse is for it to recognise tactical or big winning/losing positional themes before they are searched which can then be applied to an evaluation function. The problem is to search more than 3 nodes per second and I'm new to pattern recognition so I have no idea what I'm doing. (Read: it doesn't recognise anything.)
On a personal note I must have gotten my first book on fractals when I was 11. (For Dutch readers: Vuiks verhandelingen.) Thought I had gotten the anwsers to the universe and everything. If we knew this why wasn't it on tv and on the news every night?