4 ms·

> Give the world-champions each a copy of AlphaGo on equal computers. Have them play Go against each other WITH computer assistance. Two problems with this pla

> Give the world-champions each a copy of AlphaGo on equal computers. Have them play Go against each other WITH computer assistance. Two problems with this plan: (1) the best players at human vs. human Go are likely not as good at playing on a human/computer team, and (2) it may be that the world champion human/computer team is the one that defers 100% to the computer, which seems uninteresting.

dragontamer 7y ago
> (2) it may be that the world champion human/computer team is the one that defers 100% to the computer, which seems uninteresting. AlphaZero doesn't have any randomness built into it, does it? Which means I can build preparation against the lines of play AlphaZero would want to go down. I think you're underestimating the human, and also overestimating Google's laboratory experiment here. No one has really played "Cyborg Go" yet. The first casualty of "Cyborg Go" will be AlphaGo in its current form: its clearly inadequate for AlphaGo to play deterministic. Random play MUST be incorporated, lest opponent's preparation sends it down the wrong path. If I know that AlphaGo plays slightly worse on 3-4 opening (or 4-4opening, or maybe even the 10-10-opening), then that's what I'll do. Give me a copy of AlphaGo and I'll be able to find a weakness somewhere.
- CydeWeys 7y ago
  AlphaZero uses Monte Carlo Tree Search. It definitely has randomness built in. I'm with the other guy; I don't see how a person could make the AI play any better.
  - dragontamer 7y ago
    > AlphaZero uses Monte Carlo Tree Search. It definitely has randomness built in. That's not what MCTS means. MCTS refers to the bandit problem which formulated the search parameters. MCTS always chooses the "most interesting" path to explore. (Where "most interesting" is the path that balances explore-and-exploit hyper-parameters). AlphaZero improved upon MCTS by deferring to the neural net as the hyper-parameter. But AlphaZero, for a given network on a given board-state, will ALWAYS choose the same position as "most interesting". Turning AlphaZero from its current deterministic form into a random form would be an easy fix. But its just one example of how AlphaZero really isn't designed for competitive use yet (despite playing the best game of Go of all time). Instead of picking the top #1 move, maybe you randomly pick from the top 3 moves... or some other scheme.
    - CydeWeys 7y ago
      Even if it is 100% deterministic (which I'm not convinced of, especially seeing as how distributed and thus ordering-dependent it is), if it's the best in the world, how does that help you compete against it? In order to take advantage of its determinism you'd need to be better than it, and nothing else is.
      - dragontamer 7y ago
        > if it's the best in the world, how does that help you compete against it? In order to take advantage of its determinism you'd need to be better than it, and nothing else is. Play AlphaGo against itself. Go rarely has draws (requires Triple-Ko, a very, very rare position). Almost every game you play with AlphaZero vs AlphaZero will result in a winner-and-loser. You will quickly be able to characterize the positions that AlphaZero loses in.
        CydeWeys 7y ago
        But if you're not as least as good at it you won't even be able to get to those positions. You'll lose to it much earlier in much worse ways.
        dragontamer 7y ago
        The cyborg player will have access to the best publicly available software for preparation a year ahead of any competition. For most of us, that means we'll all have the best verison of LeelaZero to grab from Github and use in our own personal studies. Which should still be super-human in terms of play.
        CydeWeys 7y ago
        How is the human player adding anything to this partnership when the program is already so much better? And don't forget that AlphaZero is gonna be getting better over that year too; you're trying to beat a moving target.

dragontamer 7y ago

> (2) it may be that the world champion human/computer team is the one that defers 100% to the computer, which seems uninteresting. AlphaZero doesn't have any randomness built into it, does it? Which means I can build preparation against the lines of play AlphaZero would want to go down. I think you're underestimating the human, and also overestimating Google's laboratory experiment here. No one has really played "Cyborg Go" yet. The first casualty of "Cyborg Go" will be AlphaGo in its current form: its clearly inadequate for AlphaGo to play deterministic. Random play MUST be incorporated, lest opponent's preparation sends it down the wrong path. If I know that AlphaGo plays slightly worse on 3-4 opening (or 4-4opening, or maybe even the 10-10-opening), then that's what I'll do. Give me a copy of AlphaGo and I'll be able to find a weakness somewhere.

CydeWeys 7y ago
AlphaZero uses Monte Carlo Tree Search. It definitely has randomness built in. I'm with the other guy; I don't see how a person could make the AI play any better.
- dragontamer 7y ago
  > AlphaZero uses Monte Carlo Tree Search. It definitely has randomness built in. That's not what MCTS means. MCTS refers to the bandit problem which formulated the search parameters. MCTS always chooses the "most interesting" path to explore. (Where "most interesting" is the path that balances explore-and-exploit hyper-parameters). AlphaZero improved upon MCTS by deferring to the neural net as the hyper-parameter. But AlphaZero, for a given network on a given board-state, will ALWAYS choose the same position as "most interesting". Turning AlphaZero from its current deterministic form into a random form would be an easy fix. But its just one example of how AlphaZero really isn't designed for competitive use yet (despite playing the best game of Go of all time). Instead of picking the top #1 move, maybe you randomly pick from the top 3 moves... or some other scheme.
  - CydeWeys 7y ago
    Even if it is 100% deterministic (which I'm not convinced of, especially seeing as how distributed and thus ordering-dependent it is), if it's the best in the world, how does that help you compete against it? In order to take advantage of its determinism you'd need to be better than it, and nothing else is.
    - dragontamer 7y ago
      > if it's the best in the world, how does that help you compete against it? In order to take advantage of its determinism you'd need to be better than it, and nothing else is. Play AlphaGo against itself. Go rarely has draws (requires Triple-Ko, a very, very rare position). Almost every game you play with AlphaZero vs AlphaZero will result in a winner-and-loser. You will quickly be able to characterize the positions that AlphaZero loses in.
      - CydeWeys 7y ago
        But if you're not as least as good at it you won't even be able to get to those positions. You'll lose to it much earlier in much worse ways.
        dragontamer 7y ago
        The cyborg player will have access to the best publicly available software for preparation a year ahead of any competition. For most of us, that means we'll all have the best verison of LeelaZero to grab from Github and use in our own personal studies. Which should still be super-human in terms of play.
        CydeWeys 7y ago
        How is the human player adding anything to this partnership when the program is already so much better? And don't forget that AlphaZero is gonna be getting better over that year too; you're trying to beat a moving target.