[computer-go] ANN(s) playing a perfect game...

["Jim O'Flaherty, Jr." <jim_oflaherty_jr@xxxxxxxxx>]

Imran,

I am working with ANNs using GAs.  What I am finding is there is a huge 
number of people who are out of synch with more modern ANN techniques, 
and write ANNs off out of hand.  It is not unique to this group.  There 
is enormous amounts of information in a number of domains.  And there 
even more "less informed self-righteous" software developers.

No one (including the uh..."geniuses" of this group) has the time to 
follow all the tangents in the many differing related fields.  And no 
single technique I have seen discussed here is going to "solve the 
computer-go problem" such that the program based on their particular 
"uber" technique will achieve a dan level rating against similarly 
skilled humans, at least not consistently and long-term.  If hardware 
speed keeps doubling, perhaps it might happen in 10 years.

I suspect a hybrid approach, which a couple people have referred to, 
will be what finally makes a substantial breakthrough.  Given the type 
of dialog I see in this group, I am very suspicious it will come from 
here.  I personally detect very little spirit of collaboration.  And I 
think the hybrid is going to require that.  I do see a member or two 
trying for collaboration.  And most of the rest of the group is so 
scarcity (it's mine, it's a secret, I'm brilliant and won't share my 
*ultimate* partial solution with you, etc.) focused, it is very 
disappointing.  It does not generate the social cohesion I think will be 
required for the hybrid.  Still, I am getting some value from the 
conversation.  And I am getting a good idea of the people I think I will 
find interesting in working with later.

And as you said, it borders on trivial to get an ANN to perform near 
perfect on the simpler games.  I know as I have done it, been on a team 
that has done it or dl'ed and tried it out for tic-tac-toe, connct-four, 
gomoku/pente and other small games.  As to ANNs playing checkers, chess, 
Go, etc. with perfect play,  HA!   I suspect that is decades off without 
some parallel hardware breakthrough.  And even then, it smacks of 
"trying hard" as opposed to "trying smart".  And it will happen much 
sooner for checkers/draughts than for chess.  And it will be eons after 
it happens for chess before it will happen for Go.  In fact, perfect 
play is likely unprovable ideal for Go.  I had put impossible - but with 
proper encoding on a future quantum computer, it might actually become 
achievable.  Who knows?


Jim O'Flaherty


Imran Ghory wrote:

> On Sat, 4 Dec 2004, John Tromp wrote:
>
>  
> > Imran Ghory wrote:
> >
> >    
> > > Nine men's morris and Connect 4 however both are, and both can be played
> > > to a very high (better than human) level by neural networks.
> > >      
> > You mean better than the average human, right?
> > To beat the best humans at Connect-4 requires (near-)perfect play,
> > which appears quite beyond the capabilities of neural nets.
> >    
> nope, neural nets can reach near-perfect play. Just knock up a quick test
> using tic-tac-toe or some other similar game and see for yourself.
>
> Imran
>  
_______________________________________________
computer-go mailing list
computer-go@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/