7 ms·
It's really amazing and impressive what LC0 has achieved with almost no money and only community pooled training matches. They were struggling to pay $600 per
by ganeshkrishnan 7y ago
It's really amazing and impressive what LC0 has achieved with almost no money and only community pooled training matches.
They were struggling to pay $600 per month for the cloud server so have a baremetal server.
Pretty sure it can beat AlphaZero at this point of time.
- mda 7y agoPretty sure Alpha zero would destroy Leela.
- mitchellgoffpc 7y agoMaybe so, but Deepmind isn’t training AlphaZero chess any further! Leela will hopefully just keep on getting better and better :)
- mda 7y agoEh, If they want, they can train Alpha zero in one day Leela can be trained in 10 years. In any case indeed Leela's progress is impressive.
- mot524 7y agoTraining AlphaZero for more than 4 hours on DeepMind's system didn't improve its strength. Makes you wonder if that's as close to ideal chess as we're ever going to get...
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- ganeshkrishnan 7y agoNo, I don't think so. Remember that AlphaZero played stockfish 8 which is pretty outdated. Some of it's moves against SF was pretty amazing and you could be right but everything is speculative right now. My only vote for LC0 is that it can win against the latest iteration of SF
- sanxiyn 7y agoStockfish 8 evaluation was in 2017. In 2018, DeepMind re-did everything with Stockfish 9 and nothing changed. https://deepmind.com/blog/alphazero-shedding-new-light-grand-games-chess-shogi-and-go/ https://deepmind.com/blog/alphazero-shedding-new-light-grand...
- nestorD 7y agoI remember an annonce saying that the go branch of leela-zero had finaly reachen the level of facebook's network. It is arguably not Alpha zero but it shows that, if they have not reached the level of Alpha-zero yet, it is only a matter of time.
- mot524 7y agoI believe AlphaZero's CNN uses 40 residual layers and LC0 uses 20 layers. So in theory, AlphaZero could have twice as much chess knowledge. So that's a reason to believe that AlphaZero might be stronger than LC0. But there's no real way to know at this point.
- umanwizard 7y agoIt's insane. Basically a hobby project and it obliterates other engines which are the result of 30+ years of computer chess research.
- currymj 7y agoI feel the opposite way: it's insane that Stockfish, running on CPUs and crude handmade heuristics, is able to keep up at all.
- umanwizard 7y agoSure, Stockfish is a very impressive piece of technology, and I'm not trying to take away from that. The way I see it, and what stands out as really cool to me is that we seem to be living through a phase transition to the third major era of chess, based on what type of player was strongest: 500 AD - 1997 AD: Humans. 1997 AD - 2019 AD: "Classical" minmax computer chess engines. 2019 AD - ???: Reinforcement learning engines. It's extremely exciting to witness. Just like the invention of the car didn't make horse races obsolete, I wonder if we'll see high-level computer chess competition split into two categories, one where using pre-trained models is not allowed.
- jhncls 7y agoKasparov complained that Deep Blue had access to a myriad of his historical games, so it could prepare purposely just against one opponent. At the same time, Kasparov hadn't any access to train against Deep Blue's way of playing. Stockfish had a similar disadvantage against Alphazero. With LC0 being more openly available, it can start improving its heuristics against this type of opponents.
- ngcc_hk 7y agoIt is called zero because it only play with itself. Follow alpha go zero and leeks zero. It has not studied human play. Unlike alpha go.