It is currently Fri Mar 29, 2024 12:32 am

All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 157 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next
Author Message
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Commonsense Go
Post #81 Posted: Sun Apr 16, 2017 5:41 pm 
Lives in gote
User avatar

Posts: 392
Liked others: 23
Was liked: 43
Rank: NR
pnprog wrote:
Your paper uses concept that are easier said than implemented. For example:

"A group with two eyes, or a single eye large enough to be able to form two eyes, is alive".

Any life and death book for beginner contains tons of examples that will challenge our definition/understanding of "single eye large enough to be able to form two eyes" (just think of group alive by seki or by ko, or by ladders). There is probably no easy way to code such concept without going for the exhaustive/recursive search.

And with that definition being already that hard (impossible?) to implement, then working out a "proof of concept" of your map will block at the second step of the cluster map (when the dead stones are noted and the color map redrawn). And so all the following steps (shadow map, groups, path...) cannot be done as well.


anything is easier to say than to do :) ... except of course, for poor Alfadog, who hasn't learned to talk and possibly never will, but that's another story...


extract from https://sites.google.com/site/djhbrown2/icgo
Swim's perceptions of lad (life and death) are only perceptions, not proofs. A single eye large enough to be able to form 2 eyes - just how big is that? In reference [4] [edit: no, i mean "Swimming with Alphago", or somewhere, i cant remember now.. oh yes, it's in "JueYi's New Move"] i discuss this issue; i haven't come up with an exact number yet, but it has to be at least 7x5. Now, of course, there are going to be enemy stones nearby, and that will affect things a lot. i discuss that issue in "JueYi's new move".

Yes, let's think about seki: what is seki? - in common parlance (ie Go books), it's a tussle between two eyeless "groups" - but that definition stops short of defining what a group is, so it's a bit vague. Of course, book authors know that readers have their own ideas of what a group is, so they don't bother defining it.

Swim is not vague. Swim doesn't think or talk about lad of "groups", but of clusters, which are precisely defined by the colour map.

Who's going to win a seki? No-one can say for sure until they read it out, as you rightly say. And that could take forever - or at least 10up170 which is too big to think about.

So Swim can't say either - so she doesn't!

The same applies to kos and ladders.

[edit2 - look, i can't prove mathematically that Swim's lad perception is 100% accurate, any more than you can prove that Alfadog's is. As it happens, i can prove mathematically that Alfa's isn't! :)- but i'm not going to do it here because it's off topic and i dont want to be swatted again.]

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Commonsense Go
Post #82 Posted: Thu Apr 20, 2017 9:11 pm 
Lives in gote
User avatar

Posts: 392
Liked others: 23
Was liked: 43
Rank: NR
One of the ironic things about commonsense, is that most people don't have it. Especially programmers. They live in a world of their own, using a sublanguage of their own, which is fine, so long as they only talk to each other.

2001-10, i had to teach usability (it was called HCI) to 2nd year undergrads and based my class on an MIT opencourseware graduate class, since it required no prior anything. one of the many nice things about that courseware, unlike html which wont let you put 2 spaces after a full stop, was that the author had assembled a "Hall of Shame" in which he put a gallery of GUI design cockups in apps from all over the place.

Well worth a look, if you're thinking of making software for people who dont speak your particular brand of geek to use.

i was prompted to write this note by an experience today which forced me to Google to find out how undo the damage i had just done to myself by pressing a button that should never have been there at just the Murphy-wrong time. luckily, i wasn't the first to fall foul of programmers being blissfully unaware of what users actually think, want and do.

https://forum.xfce.org/viewtopic.php?id=8703 :)

i might cite as another example, the variation tree navigation >> buttons on Go clients that hop 10 moves, which no-one in their right mind would ever want to do, except maybe those who have never heard of sente or quiescence and are in too much of a hurry.

three more for the hall... at least Thunar doesn't have Nemo's scrollbar that zooms instead of scrolling ... sigh.... when will they ever learn, Marlene?

PS why is it, that cover versions of songs (eg PPM, Joanie, the Kingston trio (never heard of them)) are almost never as good as the original, just as Go program clones dont match up to the original alphas?

PPS Can anyone tell me what i'm doing wrong here? (it used to work fine on xubuntu 14 but i lost it during upgrade to 16.04):

Code:
cd /home/d/go/gogui-1.4.9
sudo ./install.sh -j /usr/lib/jvm/java-8-openjdk-amd64 -s /etc
d@d-HP-Pavilion-dv6700-Notebook-PC:~/go/gogui-1.4.9$ sudo ./install.sh -j /usr/lib/jvm/java-8-openjdk-amd64
install: cannot stat 'lib/*.jar': No such file or directory
install: cannot stat 'doc/manual/html/*.html': No such file or directory
install: cannot stat 'doc/manual/man/*.1': No such file or directory

_________________
i shrink, therefore i swarm

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Commonsense Go
Post #83 Posted: Fri Apr 21, 2017 8:40 pm 
Lives in gote
User avatar

Posts: 392
Liked others: 23
Was liked: 43
Rank: NR
Updated Q&A here:

https://sites.google.com/site/djhbrown2/icgo

_________________
i shrink, therefore i swarm

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: who reads the subject line on comments? the font is so smal
Post #84 Posted: Sat Apr 22, 2017 3:40 am 
Lives in gote
User avatar

Posts: 392
Liked others: 23
Was liked: 43
Rank: NR
Code:
i swim, therefore i think


_________________
i shrink, therefore i swarm

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Commonsense Go
Post #85 Posted: Sun Apr 23, 2017 4:34 pm 
Dies with sente

Posts: 101
Liked others: 24
Was liked: 16
djhbrown wrote:


It would be very useful indeed to have some software that can explain the reasons behind AlphaGo's moves!

As for using more than one decision making agent: I am pretty sure that AlphaGo itself should already combine Monte-Carlo with some local reading module - I don't think ladders for instance can be estimated statically by any neural-network system.

How do you plan to decide in icGo between the suggestions of various modules? Let's say that the influence module tells you to play at A, the life-and-death module tells you to play B, and the generic Monte-Carlo module tells you to play C; how is the decision made between A, B and C?

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Commonsense Go
Post #86 Posted: Sun Apr 23, 2017 11:51 pm 
Lives in gote
User avatar

Posts: 392
Liked others: 23
Was liked: 43
Rank: NR
Alphaville wrote:
explain the reasons behind AlphaGo's moves!
Swim does not pretend to be able explain Alfadolfa's own reasons for her moves, but she (Swim is a she too..) can sometimes - as in *Swimming with Alphago* and in *JueYi's New Move* - find a move, which if not identical, is (i believe) close enough in strategic import to explain why Alpha's (or JueYi's) move is a good one, and, more significantly, provide a meaningful rationale for Swim's own version of it, which Monte-Carloers cannot do, because they don't reason, they just search, albeit in a convoluted guided way, better than old Zen's large patterns, but one which can't tell the difference between a baseball bat and a toothbrush, as DARPA recently showed us (or the difference between a cat and a load of Pollock's, as Rodney Brooks pointed out yonks ago).

At the moment, the best Monty Pythons can do to explain themselves is to show you their heatmaps and expected continuations, as Leela does, although even there, she doesn't show you her win% map, for some secret reason sjeng has of his own - i think it's to trip up cheats, so good on him :).

Alfa et al can read ladders 361+ rungs long - even as we speak, Leela is still thinking about what Andrew should do in MiG34; over 24 hrs of thinking, 5 million positions examined, and still counting... she seems stuck on O8 (67.41 win%), with Andrew's N6 coming in 4th, and Swim's F10 in 6th place with an estimated win% of 65.51.

Leela isn't as bright as Nick, however, because in their original video, Nick already said he should resign even before move 116, but Leela still thinks he has a 100-67.41 = 32.59% chance. Given how absurd that is, measuring woefully inaccurate estimates to two decimal places seems a trifle unnecessary...

Alphaville wrote:
How do you plan to decide in icGo between the suggestions of various modules?
Obviously, Swim wouldn't ask anyone whose opinion she didn't value, and she regards all opinions as equally valid.

So, in Mig34 for example, Andrew proposes 4 candidates, Swim another 4 (in the vid, i mistakenly included G9, which doesn't fit Swim's criteria) and now Leela is coming up with another 4 different ones (O8, O9, K8 and F11, in that order), making 13 candidates all up.

The sensible thing for Swim to do is to examine each of these by seeing how white could respond, and reassessing the situation, etc, until byo-yomi starts to run out (i see no merit in Swim allowing herself to drop even a single byo-yomi flag, no matter how many she has).

I don't like the idea of trying to use Swim's value function as a decision maker like Alfredo's value net does; it's better to use it just as a preliminary perception to choose a strategy.

So, when byo-yomi starts to run out, i reckon Swim should defer to Leela's latest appraisal (which could be of a downstream position starting from an intial move Swim or Andrew suggested), since Leela will at least have made a big effort to read ahead, even if, like Alfadolfa, she doesn't "know" what she's looking for until she gets there (ie the end of a Monte-Carlo rollout).

PS Since it's not, as John McCarthy advocated, a one-design sailboat race (ie standardised hardware), i don't see why Swim shouldn't have googleplexes of parallel cpus as well, except that i'm not going to buy them. right, time's up; i have to go and repair my brand new rusty old second-hand bicycle that i bought for 50 bucks this morning, which to my way of thinking is every bit as fit for purpose as the $4000 gleaming new carbon-fibre ultralight monster in the showroom.

PPS i asked on reddit how much is that alfadoggie in the windows, but it was taken down as fast as it was putten up, so you will have to do the sums yourself.

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Commonsense Go
Post #87 Posted: Mon Apr 24, 2017 5:30 am 
Lives in sente

Posts: 1037
Liked others: 0
Was liked: 180
I still think you need to give your reasons why you think "the ability to explain why while doing some task" is NECESSARILY better than "doing the task". What I mean by that, is why you think IN THIS CASE it implies being better at doing the task. We do not ordinarily expect that to be true. Consider the adage "them that can, do; those that can't, teach how to do". We all know examples of this. Being able to do something well and being able to teach/explain doing that something are quite different -- teaching is a separate skill. The better teacher of X might not be the best doer of X, and at least with humans, we do not expect that to be the case. As a student, we likely profit most from the better teacher as opposed to the better doer, so I am NOT arguing against your proposal for that use. I am just asking WHY you think "better teacher (able to explain why) implies a better doer".

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Commonsense Go
Post #88 Posted: Mon Apr 24, 2017 6:13 am 
Lives in gote

Posts: 408
Location: Poland, Gliwice
Liked others: 127
Was liked: 94
Rank: EGF 3kyu
Universal go server handle: tommyray (1d/2d)
Mike Novack wrote:
I still think you need to give your reasons why you think "the ability to explain why while doing some task" is NECESSARILY better than "doing the task". What I mean by that, is why you think IN THIS CASE it implies being better at doing the task. We do not ordinarily expect that to be true. Consider the adage "them that can, do; those that can't, teach how to do". We all know examples of this. Being able to do something well and being able to teach/explain doing that something are quite different -- teaching is a separate skill. The better teacher of X might not be the best doer of X, and at least with humans, we do not expect that to be the case. As a student, we likely profit most from the better teacher as opposed to the better doer, so I am NOT arguing against your proposal for that use. I am just asking WHY you think "better teacher (able to explain why) implies a better doer".


In go both are the same, making a distinction between doer and teacher is rather false in this case.

However, you have asked an important question. It's a tough one :). Let me rephrase it: why anybody wants to know and understand x, when x can be done automatically without any cognitive action involved, and without any understanding of action? Good question, philosophical one, why do we want to know anything? :)

And then you got it all wrong starting from second sentence ;)
What kind of argument in terms of logic is this Doer vs Teacher? It's induction, it's anecdotical, and it has logic value of 0.

The point of the SWIM thing proposed by djhbrown is to provide explanation for us, humans, in natural language, using our heuristics for description of situation on the board. Good enough for me.

_________________
Tsumego/Tesuji apps for iPad, iPhone & Android devices:http://www.lifein19x19.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=18&t=7511

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Commonsense Go
Post #89 Posted: Mon Apr 24, 2017 6:56 am 
Lives in gote
User avatar

Posts: 392
Liked others: 23
Was liked: 43
Rank: NR
John Cleese wrote:
it is not an ex-parrot, it has not ceased to be, because it never was in the first place.
Mike Novack wrote:
I am just asking WHY you think "better teacher (able to explain why) implies a better doer".
to repeat and emphasise what i said last time you raised that exact question in this very thread, i don't think that, never thought that, never will think that.

neither did i ever say what you say i think.

i didn't raise my voice then, nor do i do so now, because i know you are sincere, even if a little heavy-handed with the caps lock.

to the best of my memory, the last time you raised the same thing (maybe you forgot you did), i cited the example of Boris Becker's coach not being able to beat him (or it may have been Andy Murray's, i can't recall who it was exactly - probably Boris', because i remember being impressed that his much older coach could return his boom-boom serve, which few humans on the planet could do at the time. the coach explained that he had to move before Boris put racket to ball, which made so much sense i tried to apply it in my own tennis game, and it sure did improve my return of serve at the time. the same basic principle applies to Bobby Jones' waggle (not Bobby, that other great of the day) - ie get your body moving before you do anything else. Hey, maybe we should wiggle our fingers before putting a stone down?!... But i can't stand those types that rattle the stones in their bowl when i'm trying to think, or have an "uncontrollable" cough in the middle of my backswing.

it might make dialogue flow more productively if you could refrain from starting out with "you think X", and instead criticise or query what i actually write, not what you think i think.

i DO think - and have written (in video) - that all Monte Pythons have an inherent, intrinsic, hole in their defences (we could call it the Alpha-hole, or A-...., no, better not) that pros might (please note the use of the conditional here) be able to exploit.

Maybe Swim could too...:)

i call this the Monte-Carlo analogue of the Horizon Effect. I discuss it at length in one of my videos.

Sure, that video was made before Alphago appeared on the scene, and her strength took me by surprise as much as anyone, but she's still Monte, so still horizon-bound, as Lee Sedol demonstrated.

Despite this, i don't think Ke Jie has any chance, and i DO think that he agrees with that, because he said as much, in print, before i came independently to the same conclusion. So he was very wise to ask for appearance money - which, by the way, you and i have to pay for, by paying extra for the goods that are advertised on Google, to defray the producers' and retailers' advertising costs, even if we have ad-blockers, a software tool that is even more of a public service than Swim.

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Commonsense Go
Post #90 Posted: Mon Apr 24, 2017 9:15 am 
Lives in gote
User avatar

Posts: 392
Liked others: 23
Was liked: 43
Rank: NR
lobotommy wrote:
The point of the SWIM thing proposed by djhbrown is to provide explanation for us, humans, in natural language, using our heuristics for description of situation on the board. Good enough for me.
:) here we go... actually, as it happens, as far as i am concerned, that's not my point of the Swim thing at all and never was! - and i've said so before in this thread too....:)

i started my journey on this topic back in 1971, when i set out to see if i could program a computer to learn a language. i figured that children begin by learning single word associations, and then move on to Chomsky type 3, then 1, skipping 2 because people dont think that way, except some Bishop in 18something or other, who caused all the trouble for schoolkids today because he misunderstood Artistotle. Specifically, a Sentence in language (as opposed to a logical statement) is NOT composed of a Subject and a Predicate (and, as Boole showed, neither is a logical statement, so Aristotle was wrong too!!).

type 0 sounds meaningless to me as far as human language is concerned; there has to be some kind of syntax - but let me tell you this: the English grammar you learned in school is completely wrong!! and i proved it, following in the footsteps of Chomsky who proved it long before when i was still in short pants - >>>>>>>>> but, thanks to a student at Shenzhen University in 2001, who asked me to explain prepositions, i discovered the syntactic form of Chomsky's hypothesised "universal grammar", which will make me famous long after i'm dead because no-one knows about it yet (not even Chomsky), despite it being there for all to see in black and white [https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2205530]

<<<<<<<<<< back in 1971, i started on the linear language of Contract Bridge-bidding, but that was too tough (for me to program a computer to learn properly), so i ended up producing a program that could learn any language :)

Or, to be more precise (and restricted), any linear language.

Such as the language of differential diagnosis of liver disease. I was disappointed when it only performed at 85% accuracy, but when i expressed this disappointment to a Professor of Internal Medicine, he said "Oh, that's as much as we get, anyway".

My program also learned to bid at Contract Bridge, but only as well as a weak amateur. I privately concluded from this that Bridge was more complicated than medicine :)

But i was still dissatisfied, because i realised that although my (nameless) concept-learning program could learn "how" to do something, it couldn't learn "why" it should do it.
[Reasoning About Games. Proc European Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Hamburg, 1978. Reprinted in AISB Newsletter 32, 14-17, 1978.]

I saw this as a significant defect, and started a new journey, which was quickly interrupted by a need to make a living, and didn't come back to it for 37 years, not until 2015, after having been ethnically cleansed and put out to grass, and having solved the riddle of who invented Christmas, and why, quicker than i would have imagined possible (it turned out to be a much straighter lineage than i had expected, just by lots of Googling, and with nothing better to do, because i was by then a rentier capitalist, living (modestly but comfortably) off the interest alone, and without the avarice of Morgan, found my old interest in Go resurface.

By then i had started to enjoy making movies, and no longer needed peer review to keep my job, as i didn't have one, so could freely indulge my sense of humour and love of exploration at the same time.

My quest was - and still is - and i am finally getting around to the point - to find a way for a machine to understand Go, not as an end in itself, but as a stepping-stone to understanding understanding in general (and yes, i did proofread that and do mean two "understanding" words; the first is the act (relation) and the second is the object (concept). C -> RC )

First came HaLY, then HoLY, then CG, then Swim, and now icGo.

Moreover - and this point is key - i do not try to make it think like a human - on the contrary, i try to make it think about the fundamental nature of Go, based upon the objective and mind-independent nature of the semeotic relationships between stones and the rules of the game. Whenever something Swim thinks happens to coincide with a Go proverb (such as Andrew's 5-space jump, for example), i celebrate the fact, but my idea of AI concurs with what i believe to be the view of its prophets McCarthy and Minsky, who say that their objective for AI is not to replicate human intelligence, but to discover the essence of intelligence in general.

As it happens, that's what Demis says he's up to as well, but frankly i am unconvinced that he and all the other neural net nutters are going in the right direction - i agree with Chomsky. btw, the epithet "nutters" is not deprecatory, it merely means people who are single-mindedly fascinated by something. Eg, Einstein and Feynman were both particle nutters; Debussy was an impressionist nutter; i (and, i like to think, Feynman) am a hierarchy nutter, etc, etc.

The aim of icGo is twofold:
1. to help people
2. to beat the pants off Alphago!

Now look here, let's get serious for a moment; i am as big a fan of Alfie as anyone, but i see a hole in her, the very same hole that was in my concept learning program all those years ago.

She knows "how", but she doesn't know "why" - and because of that, she can drive herself off a cliff, as she did in game 4.

DM found a patch for that, and have improved her by using "anti-Alpha", so she is further up the beanstalk than this time last year, which is why Ke Jie is toast.

But she still can't see eyes!!

So, it's not that Swim can explain herself, it's that she can see eyes and etc.
that might give her the edge over A's dcnn - one evidence for which is that dcnn without Monte is almost as hopeless across the board as i am. btw, GnuGo and all that lot tried to see eyes, but they couldn't see potential eyes well enough to avoid having needles stuck in them and being cut into pieces and being dumped on their backsides by even weak players like me.

and Swim can use googleplexes of cpus just as easily as the doggie in the windows, so A's comparative advantage is nothing!

Even without them, even with no Monte at all, CG found a better move than Alfie - i'm convinced J13 works, because it's kikashi, and then Swim can play Myungwan Kim's move at L10, which Swim found all by herself, with no help from Kim, who himself didn't notice it until Haylee suggested it in the middle of a different sequence she was exploring, when they were commenting on the game, before Lee made his move. That's why they were so disappointed when Lee made the wedge, because unlike all the other commentators - and Alfie! - they knew it didn't work (shouldn't have worked). Had Swim been watching over Lee's shoulder, she would have whispered in his ear not to do that silly thing that Demis even today still calls a godlike move because it beat his own baby up.

See what i mean?

Of course, every proud father sees his own child through rose-tinted glasses (until it becomes a teenager) so my view of Swim's prowess potential may well be exaggerated, but i challenge you all to this:

My God exists unless you can prove otherwise! - which you can easily do by programming her and showing that she falls over her own feet.

PS it feels good to get things off one's chest, doesn't it :)


This post by djhbrown was liked by 3 people: daal, lobotommy, Waylon
Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Commonsense Go
Post #91 Posted: Mon Apr 24, 2017 1:45 pm 
Lives in gote

Posts: 408
Location: Poland, Gliwice
Liked others: 127
Was liked: 94
Rank: EGF 3kyu
Universal go server handle: tommyray (1d/2d)
djhbrown wrote:
lobotommy wrote:
The point of the SWIM thing proposed by djhbrown is to provide explanation for us, humans, in natural language, using our heuristics for description of situation on the board. Good enough for me.
:) here we go... actually, as it happens, as far as i am concerned, that's not my point of the Swim thing at all and never was! - and i've said so before in this thread too....:)

So it's not for us, it's for "them" to be wiser? Hmmm :grumpy: ;)
If it will understand "why" it should be able to describe it's reasoning in natural language to us, or maybe some symbolic language close enough.
I'm Looking forward to see some applications. What a fun times.

_________________
Tsumego/Tesuji apps for iPad, iPhone & Android devices:http://www.lifein19x19.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=18&t=7511

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Commonsense Go
Post #92 Posted: Mon Apr 24, 2017 2:40 pm 
Lives in gote
User avatar

Posts: 392
Liked others: 23
Was liked: 43
Rank: NR
lobotommy wrote:
djhbrown wrote:
lobotommy wrote:
<meta>and so on ad infinitum,</meta>
So it's not for us, it's for "them" to be wiser? Hmmm :grumpy: ;)
copy paste paste paste
[/quote][/quote][/quote][/quote][/quote][/quote]

Your Honour, this witness is lying under oath. My client does say it's for the people, it's only that it's neither of the people nor by the people. To allege otherwise is a libellous misrepresentation that not even Hislop would stoop to - and they don't come much lower than him!

Furthermore, your Honour, the allegation that Swim doesn't know why she has to do what i tell her to do is a complete red herring meta-argument, designed only for a cheep quack on the phil o'sophy duck o'twitterscope daily show, and, furthermore, downright specious, because, because... [draws in breath, preparatory for a bellow dB worthy of Brian Blessed], SWIM IS A TOTAL MORON WHO ONLY DOES WHAT I TELL HER because i haven't figured out yet how to tell her how to learn for herself from bad experiences like reading this rubbish, but i will, i will, if you'd only stop bothering me with all these questions and let me get on with my work, because until i repair my new old bike i can't ride it.

she is my daughter, and until she comes of age, she will damn well only do what i tell her to do, even if teenage tearaways play with her insides in their bedrooms late at night when they should be sleeping, because Man's Pineal Gland is no further evolved than the birds', so he should get up when they get up and sleep when they sleep, instead of hammering on their keyboards like monkeys trying to rewrite Shekespeare late in the night and keeping all the neighbours up with thje sound of their tapping if for no other reason that their cheeping and twittering - the birds, that is, not the neighbours - will wake him up at dawn anyway....

[mops brow with large red spotted handkerchief]... Your Honour, i've quite forgotten what the question was; could you repeat it please? - but Jesus, Mary and Joseph, just look at the length of that list! Haven't these kids got anything better to do than reinvent the wheel over and over again until your head spins and your eyes fall out of their sockets??!! [collapses in apoplexy]
CURTAIN

Usher: ladies and gentleman, due to unforseen circumstances, after the interval, the role of Mr Dolittle will be played by a random member of the cast, who are all out to lunch, so can you come back next week, please? The frexits are to your right and your left, since the centre has disappeared into a black hole of Orwellian doublethink.
Your Honour, this witness is lying under oath. My client does say it's for the people, it's only that it's neither of the people nor by the people. To allege otherwise is a libellous misrepresentation that not even Hislop would stoop to - and they don't come much lower than him!

Furthermore, your Honour, the allegation that Swim doesn't know why she has to do what i tell her to do is a complete red herring meta-argument, designed only for a cheep quack on the Phil o'Sophy duck o'twitterscope daily show, and, furthermore, downright specious, because, because... [draws in breath, preparatory for a bellow dB worthy of Brian Blessed], SWIM IS A TOTAL MORON WHO ONLY DOES WHAT I TELL HER because i haven't figured out yet how to tell her how to learn for herself from bad experiences like reading this rubbish, but i will, i will, if you'd only stop bothering me with all these questions and let me get on with my work, because until i repair my new old bike i can't ride it.

she is my daughter, and until she comes of age, she will damn well only do what i tell her to do, even if teenage tearaways play with her insides in their bedrooms late at night when they should be sleeping, because Man's Pineal Gland is no further evolved than the birds', so he should get up when they get up and sleep when they sleep, instead of hammering on their keyboards like monkeys trying to rewrite Sheik'speare late in the night and keeping all the neighbours up with the sound of their tapping if for no other reason that their cheeping and twittering - the birds, that is, not the neighbours - will wake him up at dawn anyway....

[mops brow with large red spotted handkerchief]... Your Honour, i've quite forgotten what the question was; could you repeat it please? - but Jesus, Mary and Joseph, just look at the length of that list! Haven't these kids got anything better to do than reinvent the wheel over and over again until your head spins and your eyes fall out of their sockets??!! [collapses in apoplexy]
CURTAIN

Usher: ladies and gentleman, due to unforseen circumstances, after the interval, the role of Mr Dolittle will be played by a random member of the cast, who are all out to lunch, so can you come back next week, please? The frexits are to your right and your left, since the centre has disappeared into a black hole of Orwellian doublethink.

_________________
i shrink, therefore i swarm

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Commonsense Go
Post #93 Posted: Mon Apr 24, 2017 5:53 pm 
Lives in gote
User avatar

Posts: 392
Liked others: 23
Was liked: 43
Rank: NR
Attachment:
leela116heatmap.png
leela116heatmap.png [ 309.73 KiB | Viewed 10465 times ]
if a picture were worth a thousand words, i wouldn't need to say so,.. oh crumbs, i forgot to put in the most important button of all - Huh?
Attachment:
leela116.png
leela116.png [ 115.96 KiB | Viewed 10465 times ]


right, so, on my bike!

_________________
i shrink, therefore i swarm

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Commonsense Go
Post #94 Posted: Mon Apr 24, 2017 6:47 pm 
Dies with sente

Posts: 101
Liked others: 24
Was liked: 16
djhbrown wrote:
[...] dcnn without Monte is almost as hopeless across the board as i am.[...]


According to the Nature paper, the CNN-only version of AlphaGo (without MCTS) is already at amateur dan level.

djhbrown wrote:
Even without them, even with no Monte at all, CG found a better move than Alfie - i'm convinced J13 works, because it's kikashi, and then Swim can play Myungwan Kim's move at L10, which Swim found all by herself


Did you try to do a scientific analysis of the situation at that point, basically listing all the points on the board that Swim would suggest at that move? It may be that it will suggest 50 other places to play at that move.

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Commonsense Go
Post #95 Posted: Mon Apr 24, 2017 7:55 pm 
Lives in gote
User avatar

Posts: 392
Liked others: 23
Was liked: 43
Rank: NR
alphaville wrote:
CNN-only version of AlphaGo (without MCTS) is already at amateur dan level.
yes, i read that too; i'm sure it's true. so is DCNNigo on kgs. next question?
alphaville wrote:
Did you try to do a scientific analysis of the situation at that point, basically listing all the points on the board that Swim would suggest at that move? It may be that it will suggest 50 other places to play at that move.
let's see if you can put yourself in my shoes for a moment (something that is hard to do before the age of 25, because not until then is the prefrontal cortex fully developed); if you had been me and done what you ask about, wouldn't you have already said so? and if you had been me, would you have bothered to do it because it is a complete waste of time, because you would know that even that may not be the only thing Swim would look at, so you would have said that in your paper, as i did in mine.

the answer to your follow-up question you didn't ask, but perhaps intend, is already in icGo Q&A, in reply, i think, to one of your previous questions, which i thought to be jolly good.

and the answer to the unspoken metaquestion is that everyone who has ever done any experimental work of any kind knows jolly well that, like Fermat, you can't prove anything beforehand (or even after - you have to wait for whatshisface to come along and do it for you two hundred years later), so anyone that demands that you do is <expletive deleted>.

and the next time i take a break from bike-stripping i'm not going to read my email. don't the roses smell nice!? :)

and now it's time for me to ask you a question - a serious question of scientific enquiry, one that i have asked of myself many times, and addressed sociologically elsewhere and is for sure well-examined in the psychology literature, but can't remember where now, it's so long ago, probably in my book "2002 -a Space-Cadet's Odd-essay", available free in all good bookstores - it's the sort of question that someone who likes making polls should make a poll about.......

........


,,,,,,,,,


;;;;;;;;; (wait for it)



$$$$$$$$$$$$








why do YOU play Go?

_________________
i shrink, therefore i swarm

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Commonsense Go
Post #96 Posted: Mon Apr 24, 2017 8:42 pm 
Dies with sente

Posts: 101
Liked others: 24
Was liked: 16
djhbrown wrote:
yes, i read that too; i'm sure it's true. so is DCNNigo on kgs.


Interesting, didn't know about DCNNigo, found some reference here: http://computer-go.org/pipermail/comput ... 07619.html. Looks like an early, no-so-successful attempt to use neural networks for go.

djhbrown wrote:
let's see if you can put yourself in my shoes for a moment (something that is hard to do before the age of 25, because not until then is the prefrontal cortex fully developed); if you had been me and done what you ask about, wouldn't you have already said so? and if you had been me, would you have bothered to do it because it is a complete waste of time, because you would know that even that may not be the only thing Swim would look at, so you would have said that in your paper, as i did in mine.


Sorry I am not sure I understand. Can you clarify please, what are the other moves Swim suggests at that place in the game, and what it the relative weight of the one you are talking about, among all others? As I am sure you know from your long scientific career, if you pick and choose only some results for the sake of making your work look better than it is, you will lose the trust and respect of the scientific community.

djhbrown wrote:
why do YOU play Go?


I play go because I enjoy the intellectual challenge.


This post by alphaville was liked by: Waylon
Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Commonsense Go
Post #97 Posted: Tue Apr 25, 2017 1:04 am 
Lives in gote
User avatar

Posts: 392
Liked others: 23
Was liked: 43
Rank: NR
DCNNigo of years ago (was it 1983?... 2014??! i'm sure the first Go dcnn was much older than that)
https://arxiv.org/abs/1412.3409 [ah, maybe Brugmann was '83; i did make a note of it somewhere but can't remember where now... what's the name of that disease when you start to forget things?)
is where the alphago team got their idea from; they just glued on monte and silver's hill-climber. i'm not on the inside, but in an early intro they said that they made alpha to beat Demis, because he won all the other games they played against him; so all he had to do was polish up his PR speech - he's a persuasive talker, except when he gets excited, when he turns into Baldrick saying "Right? right? right?":) Anyhow, PR is the CEO's job, to wave the flag to keep the bikkies rolling in, and he does a first class job of that.

alphaville wrote:
Sorry I am not sure I understand. Can you clarify please, what are the other moves Swim suggests at that place in the game, and what it the relative weight of the one you are talking about, among all others?
you can follow the algorithms in the paper just as easily as i can and find out for yourself. btw, no weights are involved, except f,g and h, which only fiddle with the perceptual harmonics to choose between playsafe and attack. and yes, playsafe does involve attacking too - it's all in the paper.

alphaville wrote:
if you pick and choose only some results for the sake of making your work look better than it is, you will lose the trust and respect of the scientific community.
0. i am flat out just running through one example, never mind 50. you do it. just do it.
1. there is no such thing as a "scientific community" - it is a schoolteachers' and PR man's myth. academia is a wasteland for those who cannot do, who teach, those who cannot teach, who teach teachers, and those who cannot boil an egg without burning the water, who edit journals because they have no original ideas of their own. Science is a multicoloured battlefield of warring tribes and squabbling tribulets, each waving their own flags and spitting on those of others, no different from football, or game of thrones (whatever the hell that is (dont tell me, i dont want to know), or NATO, or whatever. academics and scientists, as Feynman says in MiG25, are just people. and whenever you put two people together, you get three different points of view :) - actually many more, because everyone, you included, contain in your noddle a whole smogasbord of mutually inconsistent beliefs.
2. if you trust someone's view - especially your own - then you are, by definition, not a scientist. the foundation of science is healthy skepticism; above all, skepticism of ones' own ideas.
3. respect? give me a break! Chomsky has one of the finest minds that ever lived, yet half the world that's heard of him hates and despises him. maybe more than half... certainly, you can't respect Chomsky and vote for Trump, or Clinton (either of them) or indeed any president since Kennedy. and only a couple of those before him, ever since the year dot. btw, why did US want independence? Do you know why Lincoln was shot? I bet you don't (i only found out last year). Do you know who invented Christmas, and when, and why? It's not what you were taught. Do you know why Isis is called Isis? Do you know the historical connection between Isis and Christmas? ....these pretzels are making me thirsty!
4. if you read my reply to tommy the lobby tank engine, you will see that i no longer have to tick anyone else's boxes to put food on the table. as Tommy, the hero of Tommy, says: "I'm free!, I'm free!" ars longa vita brevis.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5lsQUq9 ... Q2h2UALN0h

alphaville wrote:
I play go because I enjoy the intellectual challenge.
Why do you enjoy the intellectual challenge of doing something that is utterly pointless? (pun intended)- when you could be going out to save the world, or the whales, or planning your personal finances, or getting a girlfriend, or avoiding being ripped off by Morgan and Co (and Co, and Co, and Co, and Co, and...), or lifting the stones of politics and newspapers and tv to see what's wriggling underneath the polished spun facade of half-truths and outright lies.... or watch any of John Pilger's or Oliver Stone's movies and think about what you are hearing and seeing - all much more intellectually challenging and personally valuable than playing Go, which is fit only for Commies, because all the stones are equal - the exact opposite of chess, with its knights and bishops and sacrificial pawns. Or read Winnie the Pooh - one of the most readable expositions of Lao Tse's philosophy ever written, which is in my view the only sensible social philosophy ever written down. You may not get it at first, so start with The Tao of Pooh to get the cliffnotes beforehand,beginning with the vinegar-eaters.

No no no, you really have no idea why you enjoy Go, because it's all in your subconscious, of which your conscious has, by definition and in practice, no awareness - none at all. it's a one-way street from downstairs to upstairs... well, most of it is, anyway. Google Sydney Brenner and hear what he has to say about it. Come to think of it, he's in another of the MiG series, forget which one offhand.

Our time is up, see my receptionist on the way out to pay your bill.

PS you are asking the right questions, keep them coming and i will do what i can to reply meaningfully and not just supercilliously nod.

_________________
i shrink, therefore i swarm

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Commonsense Go
Post #98 Posted: Tue Apr 25, 2017 1:25 am 
Gosei

Posts: 1494
Liked others: 111
Was liked: 315
SWIM has absolutely no value to computer go programming, you might as well write use
Wait for Opponent to Move
Play Optimal Response
and you would have something as equally pithy vague and unimplementable in front of you, even if it did have some grain of truth hidden inside it. Surprised that this concept of Commonsense Go has generated so many responses, you couldn't even get to the level of the 4 step beginners guide with this.

_________________
North Lecale

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Commonsense Go
Post #99 Posted: Tue Apr 25, 2017 3:07 am 
Lives in gote
User avatar

Posts: 392
Liked others: 23
Was liked: 43
Rank: NR
talking of vinegar... :)

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Commonsense Go
Post #100 Posted: Tue Apr 25, 2017 7:31 pm 
Dies with sente

Posts: 101
Liked others: 24
Was liked: 16
djhbrown wrote:
alphaville wrote:
if you pick and choose only some results for the sake of making your work look better than it is, you will lose the trust and respect of the scientific community.

0. i am flat out just running through one example, never mind 50. you do it. just do it.


Let me know if I misunderstood your logic, here's what I think you want to show: given the Swim's algorithm, and given the 4th game between AG and LS, you show how one particular move you chose might have been suggested if we applied Swim in that position.

Emphasis on: you chose a particular move, then you worked backwards to justify how Swim is great.

The proper way to convince others about Swim value is very different: you start with that position, you show how you apply Swim, what moves are suggested by different top-down agents/goals, then show what exactly is the process to select "the move that 'satisfices' most goals" if I understand how Swim works.

Do this, then we are talking.

Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 157 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next

All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group