4 ms·

One of these games was designed to be hard for computers, the others are way less popular than go and have far less history, and hence competition/interest. It

by rockdoe 12y ago

One of these games was designed to be hard for computers, the others are way less popular than go and have far less history, and hence competition/interest. It's an exaggeration but a pretty minor one.

hyperpape 12y ago
Yes, but as I pointed out, there's also less human interest in those games. That affects both humans and computers. No one is a grandmaster at Arimaa, Hex or Havannah. If those games were more popular, then both computers and professionals would be better. As far as the quality of the exaggeration, I think it is misleading. Shogi programs are just catching the best humans in 2013-2014. Go may not resist artificial intelligence for another ten years. That's a noticeable difference, but also not that grand of one. I'd just like a little accuracy: we may not be dealing with more than moderate differences in difficulty.
- hajile 12y ago
  Shogi programs only match up in the standard 9x9 board. They fall far behind the moment you introduce a larger variant. As to go, computers have a hard to time with 9x9 and a handicap. 13x13, 19x19, or larger is even further out of the question. The fundamental issue is that the problem must be solved entirely with heuristics. We have trouble modeling cat brains. We are a long way away from human-level pattern recognition heuristics.
  - hyperpape 12y ago
    Your knowledge of the situation in Go seems out of date. On the 9x9 board, bots are perhaps equal with professionals, or just behind them. On 19x19, they regularly win with 4 stone handicaps. See: http://www.computer-go.info/h-c/index.html http://www.computer-go.info/h-c/index.html
    - RBerenguel 12y ago
      Bots are still somewhat behind pros (last February pros scored 4-0 agains bots in 9x9... I love 9x9 so I try to keep up with this :) )
    - rtpg 12y ago
      4 stone is a pretty big handicap (though I can't win against pros with 9 so I guess there's that :))

by rockdoe 12y ago

hyperpape 12y ago

Yes, but as I pointed out, there's also less human interest in those games. That affects both humans and computers. No one is a grandmaster at Arimaa, Hex or Havannah. If those games were more popular, then both computers and professionals would be better. As far as the quality of the exaggeration, I think it is misleading. Shogi programs are just catching the best humans in 2013-2014. Go may not resist artificial intelligence for another ten years. That's a noticeable difference, but also not that grand of one. I'd just like a little accuracy: we may not be dealing with more than moderate differences in difficulty.

hajile 12y ago
Shogi programs only match up in the standard 9x9 board. They fall far behind the moment you introduce a larger variant. As to go, computers have a hard to time with 9x9 and a handicap. 13x13, 19x19, or larger is even further out of the question. The fundamental issue is that the problem must be solved entirely with heuristics. We have trouble modeling cat brains. We are a long way away from human-level pattern recognition heuristics.
- hyperpape 12y ago
  Your knowledge of the situation in Go seems out of date. On the 9x9 board, bots are perhaps equal with professionals, or just behind them. On 19x19, they regularly win with 4 stone handicaps. See: http://www.computer-go.info/h-c/index.html http://www.computer-go.info/h-c/index.html
  - RBerenguel 12y ago
    Bots are still somewhat behind pros (last February pros scored 4-0 agains bots in 9x9... I love 9x9 so I try to keep up with this :) )
  - rtpg 12y ago
    4 stone is a pretty big handicap (though I can't win against pros with 9 so I guess there's that :))