Hi Marc, "but did not find a "solution" for Lee Sedol that broke AlphaGos position" -- this is not true. Ke Jie and Gu Li both found more than one way to break the position :)
On Sun, Mar 13, 2016 at 5:26 AM, Marc Landgraf <mahrgel...@gmail.com> wrote: > What is the most interesting part is, that at this point many pro > commentators found a lot of aji, but did not find a "solution" for Lee > Sedol that broke AlphaGos position. So the question remains: Did > AlphaGo find a hole in it's own position and tried to dodge that? Was > it too strong for its own good? Or was it a misevaluation due to the > immense amounts of aji, which would not result in harm, if played > properly? > > > 2016-03-13 9:54 GMT+01:00 Darren Cook <dar...@dcook.org>: > > From Demis Hassabis: > > When I say 'thought' and 'realisation' I just mean the output of > > #AlphaGo value net. It was around 70% at move 79 and then dived > > on move 87 > > > > https://twitter.com/demishassabis/status/708934687926804482 > > > > Assuming that is an MCTS estimate of winning probability, that 70% > > sounds high (i.e. very confident); when I was doing the computer-human > > team experiments, on 9x9, with three MCTS programs, I generally knew I'd > > found a winning move when the percentages moved from the 48-52% range > > to, say, 55%. > > > > I really hope they reveal the win estimates for each move of the 5 > > games. It will especially be interesting to then compare that to the > > other leading MCTS programs. > > > > Darren > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Computer-go mailing list > > Computer-go@computer-go.org > > http://computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go > _______________________________________________ > Computer-go mailing list > Computer-go@computer-go.org > http://computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go >
_______________________________________________ Computer-go mailing list Computer-go@computer-go.org http://computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go
