4 ms·
One of the authors here! I think from a perspective of humans playing Go this result is not very interesting since, as you say, Tromp-Taylor isn't the kind of r
by AdamGleave 4y ago
One of the authors here! I think from a perspective of humans playing Go this result is not very interesting since, as you say, Tromp-Taylor isn't the kind of ruleset humans like to play under. But KataGo was trained under (modified) Tromp-Taylor which we also evaluate under, so we think from an AI security and robustness stand point it's interesting that it fails at the rule set it was trained on.
> When they induce KataGo to play bad moves, like Lee Sedol did in the only game he won against AlphaGo, they'll have my attention.
That said, we are working to do exactly this! In particular, we found in the paper that we could patch the victim to not pass except in the end-game and defeat this adversarial policy. But, when we repeat the attack, we do eventually find an adversarial policy that can exploit the victim -- and this doesn't depend on the rule set. That part is still a work in progress, we've only got it working against a victim without search for example, but we hope to put out an updated revision including this in a month or two!
- pmontra 4y ago> That part is still a work in progress I hope to see the result soon.
- tasuki 4y agoAny human referee would declare KataGo the winner in any of these games, just like they did in the Robert Jasiek vs Csaba Mero case[0]. > But KataGo was trained under (modified) Tromp-Taylor which we also evaluate under, so we think from an AI security and robustness stand point it's interesting that it fails at the rule set it was trained on. Have you done anything in particular to induce this, or is it just the case that KataGo is completely incompetent at evaluating what constitutes a pass-alive territory? > That part is still a work in progress, we've only got it working against a victim without search for example That would still be amazing. KataGo without search is still a beast. --- By the way, your website is weird: 1. "strength of a top-100 European professional" - Europe doesn't have that many professionals? 2. "Yet our adversary achieves a 99% win rate against this victim by playing a counterintuitive strategy." - Well, if your main goal is to leave a stone in your opponent's territory, this strategy isn't very counterintuitive? [0]: https://senseis.xmp.net/?DisputeMeroJasiek https://senseis.xmp.net/?DisputeMeroJasiek