[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [computer-go] ANN(s) playing a perfect game...
Jim:
I enjoyed your note. Do you have a site where your
ANN work is published? Let me know. If this is
proprietary, I understand.
Thanks
Campbell
--- "Jim O'Flaherty, Jr." <jim_oflaherty_jr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
> 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/
>
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - 250MB free storage. Do more. Manage less.
http://info.mail.yahoo.com/mail_250
_______________________________________________
computer-go mailing list
computer-go@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/