3 ms·

Can someone clarify why exactly is this being presented as more impressive than beating Chess masters or even Go masters? People talk a lot about number of sta

• roenxi 10y ago
  What struck me looking at the AlphaGo papers was how human its algorithms were - it was basically doing what a highly orthadox human player would do (pick some moves that look interesting, read as deeply as possible) and then scaling up with a completely inhuman thoroughness and accuracy. At this stage, AI wins in competitive games simply will not impress me. From here it may simply be a tour of force showing the breadth of fields AI can dominate in. After that enthusiastic agreement; poker wins are evidence for the laypeople of something I suspect most people in AI research or game theory already know - a human bluffing isn't a magic advantage in a fair game. The AI can outperform on fundamentals.
• 6nf 10y ago
  The game of poker differs from Go and Chess in that poker players deal with incomplete information and therefore a successful strategy has to include randomness. If you are dealt AA under the gun, you can't just raise 100% of the time, you have to play a mixture of different moves, perhaps raise big 80% of the time, raise small 10% of the time and limp in 10% of the time (for example). With Go or Chess you can just play the best move in each particular situation and you will not lose. It's just a different kind of game