Congratulations, Aja and David! Very remarkable win! Pasky,
It's too early to conclude any, I think, because no records of losing games have been published, ie., no weakpoints of AlphaGo are open. I believe that the essential problems which come from current MCTS (bottom-up) framework, such as solving complex semeai's and double-ko's, aren't solved yet. Hideki Petr Baudis: <20160309171109.gu12...@machine.or.cz>: > Hi! > >On Wed, Mar 09, 2016 at 04:43:23PM +0900, Hiroshi Yamashita wrote: >> AlphaGo won 1st game against Lee Sedol! > > Well, I have to eat my past words - of course, there are still four >games to go, but the first round does not look like a lucky win at all! > > Huge congratulations to the AlphaGo team, you have done truly amazing >work, with potential to spearhead a lot of further advances in AI in >general! It does seem to me that you must have made a lot of progress >since the Nature paper though - is that impression correct? > > Do you have some more surprising breakthroughs and techniques in store >for us, or was the progress mainly incremental, furthering the training >etc.? > > > By the way, there is a short snippet in the paper that maybe many >people overlooked (including me on the very first read!): > >> We introduce a new technique that caches all moves from the search >> tree and then plays similar moves during rollouts; a generalisation of >> the last good reply heuristic. At every step of the tree traversal, the >> most probable action is inserted into a hash table, along with the >> 3 × 3 pattern context (colour, liberty and stone counts) around both the >> previous move and the current move. At each step of the rollout, the >> pattern context is matched against the hash table; if a match is found >> then the stored move is played with high probability. > > This looks like it might overcome a lot of weaknesses re semeai etc., >enabling the coveted (by me) information flow from tree to playouts, if >you made this to work well (it's similar to my "liberty maps" attempts, >which always failed though - I tried to encode a larger context, which >maybe wasn't good idea). > > Would you say this improvement is important to AlphaGo's playing >strength (or its scaling), or merely a minor tweak? > > > Thanks, > >-- > Petr Baudis > If you have good ideas, good data and fast computers, > you can do almost anything. -- Geoffrey Hinton >_______________________________________________ >Computer-go mailing list >Computer-go@computer-go.org >http://computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go -- Hideki Kato <mailto:hideki_ka...@ybb.ne.jp> _______________________________________________ Computer-go mailing list Computer-go@computer-go.org http://computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go
