Actually chess software is much, much better. I recall that today's software
running on 1998 hardware beats 1998 software running on today's hardware.
It was very soon after 1998 that ordinary PCs could play on a par with world
champions.
-Original Message-
From: Computer-go [mailto:com
I think that a desktop computer's calculating power appear to develop to a
necessary level sooner then the algorithm may be optimized to use the power
nowdays available. For example, I belive that chess programs run on a desktop
well not because of a new better algotrithm but because the Deep Bl
>> global, more long-term planning. A rumour so far suggests to have used the
>> time for more learning, but I'd be surprised if this should have sufficed.
>
> My personal hypothesis so far is that it might - the REINFORCE might
> scale amazingly well and just continuous application of it...
Agre
On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 09:33:52AM +0100, Robert Jasiek wrote:
> On 11.03.2016 08:24, Huazuo Gao wrote:
> >Points at the center of the board indeed depends on the full board, but
> >points near the edge does not.
>
> I have been wondering why AlphaGo could improve a lot between the Fan Hui
> and L
On 11.03.2016 08:24, Huazuo Gao wrote:
Points at the center of the board indeed depends on the full board, but
points near the edge does not.
I have been wondering why AlphaGo could improve a lot between the Fan
Hui and Lee Sedol matches incl. learning sente and showing greater signs
of more
