3 ms·
"We also analysed the relative performance of AlphaZero’s MCTS search compared to the state-of-the-art alpha-beta search engines used by Stockfish and Elmo. Alp
by magoghm 9y ago
"We also analysed the relative performance of AlphaZero’s MCTS search compared to the state-of-the-art alpha-beta search engines used by Stockfish and Elmo. AlphaZero searches just 80 thousand positions per second in chess and 40 thousand in shogi, compared to 70 million for Stockfish and 35 million for Elmo. AlphaZero compensates for the lower number of evaluations by using its deep neural network to focus much more selectively on the most promising variations – arguably a more “human-like” approach to search, as originally proposed by Shannon." <- Amazing!
- maxander 9y agoMeanwhile a human player considers <1 position per second, so there’s a few orders of magnitude left to go in that direction. But unsettlingly few, nonetheless.
- nopinsight 9y agoHumans are also much weaker than AlphaZero in these three games. The difference in the numbers of positions searched might be responsible for a substantial part of that.
- yters 9y agoIt'd be interesting to weaken AZ until it is on par with a human, and then compare moves evaluated. I'd suspect humans still evaluate significantly fewer moves.
- aidenn0 9y agoStrong human players consider a lot more than 1 position per second in Chess...