4 ms·
This webpage is rather more informative: https://goattack.far.ai/human-evaluation https://goattack.far.ai/human-evaluation allowing one to replay all games. I
by tromp 4y ago
This webpage is rather more informative:
https://goattack.far.ai/human-evaluation https://goattack.far.ai/human-evaluation
allowing one to replay all games.
It looks like the strategy involves letting the computer completely surround a group with 2 eyes, and then depriving that surrounding group of 2 eyes (which the AI appears to be blind to).
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- drewcoo 4y ago> depriving that surrounding group of 2 eyes (which the AI appears to be blind to) Completely blind or just lacking depth perception?
- tromp 4y agoI think it has learned that stones completely within your own ring of stones are dead and can just be assumed part of your own eyespace. It has just failed to learn the exceptional case where such stones form 2 eyes.
- hinkley 4y agoI thought Kasparov had a perfectly reasonable argument that in a human v human contest, the players and any coaches have access to a public record of all previous contests the opponent participated in, and can use this information to prepare for a match. Deep Blue had Kasparov's record, but he didn't have Deep Blue's record, which is lopsided. You are always exploiting the flaws of your opponent in these games. Winning is a matter of exploiting more than you have been exploited.
- ZephyrBlu 4y agoExactly. Human player are never given enough of a chance to exploit the AIs. When an OP strategy exists in the metagame literally the whole playerbase tries to exploit it, which is how the metagame evolves. No such process exists for playing against AIs.