Life In 19x19

Saying LZ is 15 dan is pretty meaningless IMO, especially if you aren't clear what 1 dan difference means (is it give 1 stone handicap or a winrate difference?). What I can say is watching LZ play Japanese pros on wbaduk LZ always wins, sometimes forcing a resign before move 100, and that's not ...

It is good to know that LZ is 15 Dan presently. It is very impressive.
What elo number would corresponds to human 9 Dan strength?
I am curious at who point LZ left human behind, and the number of self-played games to get to that point.

Hi chut,

Suppose we have anecdotal evidence that the current best engine (which may not be LZ) is roughly 2 or 3 stones better than top human pros, how does that affect your life ? ( What would you do about it ? ) Same question: for ~5 stones.
Curious about the human feelings behind the question ...

A question - in the current Elo scale used in leela zero Strength Graph, where would human professional be? Can someone give a rough range? How many dan rank is LZ stronger than human now?

LZ trying to escape a ladder and failed.
Games between AQ-GO (w) and LZ (b)
Both are android version running on the same phone. There are threads on how to set up both in this forum.
LZ is set to 10 sec/move
Screenshot_2018-08-22-01-10-19-838_cn.ezandroid.aqgo.png

10 sec/move on android is not a ...

I think there is definitely a missing link here. The intermediate patterns in the middle of a ladder/capturing race has no meaning. It is the board position when the ladder is fully elaborated that we can attribute a meaningful winrate to it. When I got LZ to play out a failed ladder, that is ...

Human recognize a ladder and life/death of a group (big or small) as a top level evaluation. As I see this level of reasoning is absent in the current architecture for go. If there is no help from this level of reasoning, the MCTS will never know that a certain branch need to push deep, and it is ...

Winrate already means confidence in winning, and uncertainity is measured by visit counts. So we already have [estimate,visits] which MCTS is based on. You can, for example, adjust down the weight of the just performed visit based on some error term, or adjust its resulting value estimate as above ...

I still don't see how. If a bot had a winrate estimate and an error term, it could transform those to a better estimate with no error term. Why would it keep and use the lower quality estimate in this case? And the error term doesn't apply to the corrected estimate.

The error term, if it exists ...

CrazyStone is free, it has a solid 2 dan strength.
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=jp.co.unbalance.android.gocsdllite&hl=en

Go Free - the Pro version need to pay a small amount (like $4), but it is well worth the money. The UI is better than any in the market. It has a solid 3 dan ...

Life/death of a group and ladder are related problems. We still see mightily strong bots fall flat on situations that are obvious to human. These are monkey wrench to the tree search because the minimax evaluation of a whole branch can become invalid if we push the search a bit deeper. That means ...

I think this is a very intriguing problem. It is a all or nothing situation. If the MCTS is not deep enough then certain pattern will never be learned. This would be worthy of a paper by itself. And the meta level algorithm to guide the MCTS - I think that is a deep learning experiment worth pursuing.

Maybe Alphago MUCH superior tree search is able to read deep enough to determine the result of a ladder often enough so it can adjust the network accordingly. In a ladder situation the network weight is meaningless without such a deep tree search. The generative adversarial networks playing each ...

I have been think about this intriguing problem a bit. I think human has a meta level logic that governs the tree search engine. So when human sees a ladder pattern forming he/she will direct the tree search to read the ladder to the end as a matter top priority. The win rate in the middle of a ...

Just wondering, where would top professionals be in LZ's scale? Around 7000?