Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Google AI Games

Google's AlphaGo AI Defeats the World's Best Human Go Player (engadget.com) 186

It isn't looking good for humanity. Google's AI AlphaGo on Tuesday defeated Ke Jie, the world's number one Go player, in the first game of a three-part match. The new win comes a year after AlphaGo beat Korean legend Lee Se-dol 4-1 in one of the most potent demonstrations of the power of AI to date. Adding insult to the injury, AlphaGo scored the victory over humanity's best candidate in China, the place where the abstract and intuitive board game was born. Engadget adds: After the match, Google's DeepMind CEO Demis Hassabis explained that this was how AlphaGo was programmed: to maximise its winning chances, rather than the winning margin. This latest iteration of the AI player, nicknamed Master, apparently uses 10 times less computational power than its predecessor that beat Lee Sedol, working from a single PC connected to Google's cloud server. [...] The AI player picked up a 10-15 point lead early on, which limited the possibilities for Jie to respond. Jie was occasionally winning during the flow of the match, but AlphaGo would soon reclaim the lead, ensuring that his human opponent had limited options to win as the game progressed.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Google's AlphaGo AI Defeats the World's Best Human Go Player

Comments Filter:
  • Adding insult to the injury, AlphaGo scored the victory over humanity's best candidate in China,

    There is no insult to losing in China. The appropriate response is, "Thank you for allowing me to win."

  • by feranick ( 858651 ) on Tuesday May 23, 2017 @10:35AM (#54470095)
    The real question is: when two identically trained systems compete against each other, what are the underlying mechanisms of competition leading to one winning?
    • It will depend on who goes first.
      That brings up a good point: AlphaGo should be able to estimate which player has the advantage, and we can adjust the compensation accordingly.

      • I remember they chose the komi such that Chinese and Japanese scoring system won't disagree who win the game. So I guess it is extremely unlikely for them to do experiment on micro komi adjustment. We don't even know if AlphaGo is komi flexible or requires complete retraining for that.
        • Komi does not influence how you play the game.
          It is just a number added to the score of the white player, as he has a small disadvantage on small boards (11x11 or 9x9).
          Perhaps you are mixing Komi up with handicap stones?
          That are stones the black player can set on the board by a given schema. Those influence the game play of white of course, as he has to fight against up to 9 stones that are already set.

          • Komi does not influence how you play the game.

            Of course it influences how one play.

            Before komi become the norm for professional game play, black openings are more conservative and white are more agressive. Slight komi adjustment may not affect amateurs like me, but for super-precise AI like AlphaGo, winning just half point the last game, komi adjustment will definitely affect how the AI treat the open game.

        • Hmm, good point. Nevertheless, which color wins if we pit AlphaGo vs AlphaGo?

  • AlphaGo at its core is an MCTS [wikipedia.org]

    For such a thing, one needs (I think) to do some unexpected moves to constantly force machine into sparsely probed regions.
    And, during discovery stage, one needs doing it "off-line" to avoid google's retraining. Thankfully, space is big enough to ensure that google can be forced quickly enough into deep woods.
    For a match like this - one needs to use different precalculated prologs for all games (won or lost).

    It's more like hacking than playing...
    • Actually Alpha Go is not an MCTS, it is a deep layered neuronal network.
      Most Go programs like 'Little Go' based on Fuego however likely are MCTSes.

  • by The Grim Reefer ( 1162755 ) on Tuesday May 23, 2017 @10:55AM (#54470261)

    It isn't looking good for humanity.

    Purpose built machines have been able to, or be used to out do humans for a very long time. A lever can be used to lift more weight than a person alone can. But we're not being ruled by sticks. Cranes can lift even more.

    Cars are used to move people further and faster than they could on their own. Computers can do many more calculations per second. These things make life better for humanity as a whole.

    Unless AlphaGo figures out a way to keep a person from unplugging it, I'm guessing that humanity will be just fine.

    • by tomxor ( 2379126 )

      It isn't looking good for humanity.

      Purpose built machines have been able to, or be used to out do humans for a very long time.

      [EDIT...]

      Unless AlphaGo figures out a way to keep a person from unplugging it, I'm guessing that humanity will be just fine.

      More specifically, "humanity will be just fine" not because we can unplug it, but because it's another single purpose tool. Yes NN approaches and ready made libraries like tensor flow can be used to create new purposes... but guess what, it takes a human, to design, build and teach the tool how to do it's job.

      The cosmic sized gap between these building blocks and the idea of something sentient that could reason, learn, create and intuit news things dynamically and autonomously is what is missing... this is

    • Funny you should say... alpha go is a general purpose learning system. It was originally taught to play Nintendo games. It isn't programmed to play Go, it learned to.

      Go is a game that abstractly simulates some aspects of military strategy, as does chess, and have long been considered means to practice strategic thinking.

      • have long been considered means to practice strategic thinking. However a NN that is playing Go is not thinking :)

    • Just don't go asking it foolish questions like "Is there a God?"

  • Is AlphaGo programmed in Go?
  • Someone call Boston Dynamics.

    Fuck.

  • by sqorbit ( 3387991 ) on Tuesday May 23, 2017 @11:39AM (#54470523)
    I'll be impressed when a computer wins Hungry Hippos, that game is obviously rigged towards anyone younger than 7. My kid beats me in it all the time.
  • It's clear that, for national security reasons, this technology should be trained and deployed to assist with foreign relations. Particularly, since it should theoretically be a master of game theory, it should be trained on a set of prior foreign relations incidents. In order to deal with North Korea and other rogue nations, it must be taught brinksmanship. In order for this to be effective and to prevent the enemy from calling our bluff, it must be given direct control of our nuclear arsenal. The only que

    • You don't need a nuclear arsenal to bomb north Korea into the stone age.

      Actually I really wonder why no western or for the matter eastern nation is sending s squad team and kills the 5 or 10 members of the Junta so the country can start over.

      Or do you really think the north Korean citizens want to live in the miserable circumstances they are in?

"The fundamental principle of science, the definition almost, is this: the sole test of the validity of any idea is experiment." -- Richard P. Feynman

Working...