I think you are reinforcing Simon's original point; i.e. using a more fine grained approach to statically approximate AlphaGo's ELO where fine grained is degree of vetting per move and/or a series of moves. That is a substantially larger sample size and each sample will have a pretty high degree of quality (given the vetting is being done by top level professionals). On Mar 22, 2016 1:04 PM, "Jeffrey Greenberg" <je...@inventivity.com> wrote:
> Given the minimal sample size, bothering over this question won't amount > to much. I think the proper response is that no one thought we'd see this > level of play at this point in our AI efforts and point to the fact that we > witnessed hundreds of moves vetted by 9dan players, especially Michael > Redmond's, where each move was vetted. In other words "was the level of > play very high?" versus the question "have we beat all humans". The answer > is more or less, yes. > > On Tuesday, March 22, 2016, Lucas, Simon M <s...@essex.ac.uk> wrote: > >> Hi all, >> >> I was discussing the results with a colleague outside >> of the Game AI area the other day when he raised >> the question (which applies to nearly all sporting events, >> given the small sample size involved) >> of statistical significance - suggesting that on another week >> the result might have been 4-1 to Lee Sedol. >> >> I pointed out that in games of skill there's much more to judge than just >> the final >> outcome of each game, but wondered if anyone had any better (or worse :) >> arguments - or had even engaged in the same type of >> conversation. >> >> With AlphaGo winning 4 games to 1, from a simplistic >> stats point of view (with the prior assumption of a fair >> coin toss) you'd not be able to claim much statistical >> significance, yet most (me included) believe that >> AlphaGo is a genuinely better Go player than Lee Sedol. >> >> From a stats viewpoint you can use this approach: >> http://www.inference.phy.cam.ac.uk/itprnn/book.pdf >> (see section 3.2 on page 51) >> >> but given even priors it won't tell you much. >> >> Anyone know any good references for refuting this >> type of argument - the fact is of course that a game of Go >> is nothing like a coin toss. Games of skill tend to base their >> outcomes on the result of many (in the case of Go many hundreds of) >> individual actions. >> >> Best wishes, >> >> Simon >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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
