It is currently Sun Sep 22, 2019 5:13 am

All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 67 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Author Message
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Leela Zero analysis of 'Making good shape' and other boo
Post #41 Posted: Sun Sep 02, 2018 10:55 am 
Judan

Posts: 6072
Location: Cambridge, UK
Liked others: 345
Was liked: 3266
Rank: UK 4 dan
KGS: Uberdude 4d
OGS: Uberdude 7d
Bill Spight wrote:
Just think. In ten years we can have "find the bot's mistakes" exercises. :lol:

That's easy, in one of the Making Good Shape problems Elf got the tesuji right but then afterwards wanted (for several thousand playouts) to play out a ladder in which one of the initial surrounding stones was in atari. :)


This post by Uberdude was liked by: Bill Spight
Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Leela Zero analysis of 'Making good shape' and other boo
Post #42 Posted: Sun Sep 02, 2018 11:47 am 
Oza

Posts: 2352
Liked others: 15
Was liked: 3417
Going back to the good shape theme of the thread, what do you make of this?



LZ on my setup starts with a White winrate of 53.6% (presumably that measures the komi as being fractionally too high).

I forced the above position, playing White 1 on A. The winrate changed to 56.6%. This was for a ponnuki based on 3-4.

When I did similar things with ponnukis based on 4-4, 4-5, 5-5 and 3-5, the winrates changed to 53.0, 54.3, 53.8 and 53.0 respectively.

I'm not sure that the difference in each winrate means much here, although I was surprised that the 4-4 based ponnuki, being nearer the centre and so (I assume*) more influential seemed the worst version. However, what I really wanted to check was the accuracy of the proverb that a ponnuki capture is worth 30 points. If you count each surviving White stone as 10 points, the proverb seems to stand up well, but perhaps it could be more accurately re-cast as either "worth three enemy plays" or "worth 30-40 points.

But the proverb that the turtle-shell capture is worth 60 points seems way off. To give just an example starting with 4-4, as below, White's winrate shot up to 64.2%.



I initially tried the centre point as the extra White move to balance the number of stones played. I assumed* that that was the best way to negate Black's influence. But LZ preferred A or B (both around 62%).

*Twice I have mentioned assumptions I made and in both cases was foolish. On reflection, seeing that LZ apparently preferred the sides, I recalled that Go Seigen made the point that what we might call the centre-sides are the most neglected parts of the board. It was that remark that led me to invent the Go Seigen Group as a joke (allied to T Mark's joke that White 8 is always wrong, according to Go Seigen), but it turned out to be a reasonable insight into the game. I'm now thinking that Go was even more right, and yet another example of how he was the Sai of the past to today's bots.

It's interesting, too, that in uberdude's investigion above, AI seems to be confirming we are right to put Fujisawa Hideyuki on a pedestal as another all-time great. Perhaps our judgements about the relative strengths of players are sound.


This post by John Fairbairn was liked by: Bill Spight
Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Leela Zero analysis of 'Making good shape' problems.
Post #43 Posted: Sun Sep 02, 2018 2:56 pm 
Lives in gote

Posts: 423
Liked others: 181
Was liked: 187
Uberdude wrote:
My policy network for this position (I expect a is the book answer, but I'd like to get b in sente first if I can). h is for giggles.
Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$Bc Problem 4. Black to play and expand moyo.
$$ ---------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . e . . . . O . . . . O b . . . . |
$$ | . . O d c . . . h , . . . . . X . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . W . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . i . X . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . a . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . X . . . |
$$ | . . . f . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O . X . . . , . . . . X X X . . |
$$ | . . . g . . . . . . . X . O . O O . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

I just checked Elf v1, and it likes b and f most. f is only available because white made a one-space jump there instead of 2 space, which Elf would prefer a bit. With this kind of Takemiya moyo building you sometimes see black making the 2-space high approach and then 2-space jump in that corner. But most interesting thing for me was what Elf preferred for white's last move instead of the marked jump: p12 reduction. That kind of move is rarely on my radar but now that I think about it I recall Matthew Macfadyen 6d suggesting such ideas in similar positions.


What surprised me a bit is LZ and ELF responses to the "correct" move.

LZ:
Attachment:
LZ.png
LZ.png [ 1.21 MiB | Viewed 1876 times ]

It's a vital point, for sure, but it seems too early, especially if LZ evaluates white as being ahead.

ELFV1:

Attachment:
ElfV1.png
ElfV1.png [ 1.2 MiB | Viewed 1876 times ]

ELFV1 agrees, but also has a more negative view of the correct move.




This post by Calvin Clark was liked by: Bill Spight
Top
 Profile  
 
Online
 Post subject: Re: Leela Zero analysis of 'Making good shape' problems.
Post #44 Posted: Sun Sep 02, 2018 3:45 pm 
Honinbo

Posts: 8820
Liked others: 2602
Was liked: 3009
Calvin Clark wrote:
Uberdude wrote:
My policy network for this position (I expect a is the book answer, but I'd like to get b in sente first if I can). h is for giggles.
Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$Bc Problem 4. Black to play and expand moyo.
$$ ---------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . e . . . . O . . . . O b . . . . |
$$ | . . O d c . . . h , . . . . . X . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . W . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . i . X . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . a . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . X . . . |
$$ | . . . f . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O . X . . . , . . . . X X X . . |
$$ | . . . g . . . . . . . X . O . O O . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

I just checked Elf v1, and it likes b and f most. f is only available because white made a one-space jump there instead of 2 space, which Elf would prefer a bit. With this kind of Takemiya moyo building you sometimes see black making the 2-space high approach and then 2-space jump in that corner. But most interesting thing for me was what Elf preferred for white's last move instead of the marked jump: p12 reduction. That kind of move is rarely on my radar but now that I think about it I recall Matthew Macfadyen 6d suggesting such ideas in similar positions.


What surprised me a bit is LZ and ELF responses to the "correct" move.

LZ:
Attachment:
LZ.png

It's a vital point, for sure, but it seems too early, especially if LZ evaluates white as being ahead.

ELFV1:

Attachment:
ElfV1.png

ELFV1 agrees, but also has a more negative view of the correct move.




Wow! It's almost as if Black's book play weren't there. :shock:

_________________
The Adkins Principle:

At some point, doesn't thinking have to go on?

— Winona Adkins

I think it's a great idea to talk during sex, as long as it's about snooker.

— Steve Davis

Top
 Profile  
 
Online
 Post subject: Re: Leela Zero analysis of 'Making good shape' and other boo
Post #45 Posted: Sun Sep 02, 2018 4:06 pm 
Honinbo

Posts: 8820
Liked others: 2602
Was liked: 3009
John Fairbairn wrote:
Going back to the good shape theme of the thread, what do you make of this?



LZ on my setup starts with a White winrate of 53.6% (presumably that measures the komi as being fractionally too high).

I forced the above position, playing White 1 on A. The winrate changed to 56.6%. This was for a ponnuki based on 3-4.


That more or less fits with my estimate that Black has lost around 6 pts. Close to equality at the beginning of the game, that means that each Leela Zero percentage point roughly corresponds to 2 pts. of territory. That is consistent with 40 year old pro statistics.

Quote:
However, what I really wanted to check was the accuracy of the proverb that a ponnuki capture is worth 30 points. If you count each surviving White stone as 10 points, the proverb seems to stand up well, but perhaps it could be more accurately re-cast as either "worth three enemy plays" or "worth 30-40 points.


Right. The 30 pt. estimate proved to be too low, based upon the fact that a 5 pt. komi is too small. But it's still worth less than 3 early enemy plays, by overconcentration. My estimate is around 36 pts. of territory.

Quote:
But the proverb that the turtle-shell capture is worth 60 points seems way off. To give just an example starting with 4-4, as below, White's winrate shot up to 64.2%.


The turtle shell is way overconcentrated. I estimate it at around 43 pts. of territory. If I'm right, the next 7 pts. of territory are worth around 8 Leela Zero percentage pts.

Edit: When I say that the ponnuki and turtle shell are over concentrated, I mean by themselves, not in the tactical context in which they are likely to arise.

_________________
The Adkins Principle:

At some point, doesn't thinking have to go on?

— Winona Adkins

I think it's a great idea to talk during sex, as long as it's about snooker.

— Steve Davis

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Leela Zero analysis of 'Making good shape' and other boo
Post #46 Posted: Mon Sep 03, 2018 3:29 am 
Judan

Posts: 6072
Location: Cambridge, UK
Liked others: 345
Was liked: 3266
Rank: UK 4 dan
KGS: Uberdude 4d
OGS: Uberdude 7d
Isn't there a section of Kageyama's "Lessons in the Fundamentals of Go" (or was it another book) where he looks at the following position (the black other corners might not be 4-4s, but top right is that shape). IIRC he says black's tenukis preceding 7 are ok, but allowing white 8 is bad because white gets a thick result without bad aji, so black should play the hane at a first to stop white getting the perfect shape so you have some aji for later and you can then take sente for the empty corner. And allowing white 8 is so bad the resulting whole board position is good for white.

Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$B
$$ +---------------------------------------+
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 1 4 . . |
$$ | . . . 3 . . . . . , . . . . . , a . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . 7 . . . . . , . . . . . 5 . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ +---------------------------------------+[/go]


I can certainly understand the idea of avoiding the perfect shape for white and that's a good lesson of making bad aji in sente, but the whole board judgement that the above is good for white is not something I've really been convinced by (at various times over the years I've preferred black and white but never with a strong conviction). Yes white is super strong, but black is speedy (a tewari argument is white made a shimari with 4 then 2, rather conservative, then added another stone at 8, very conservative/slow, and then black made a dumb wedge at 1 that strengthened white but that bad exchange can't really be worse than white's 2 slow moves can it?). Like the 3-4 high approach knight move hanging connection old joseki, I've got the feeling teachers/books have a "trust me young padawan, once you are stronger you too will appreciate the power of the force slow but thick shape". Similar with some of Shuko's famous turns (e.g. example at https://senseis.xmp.net/?Turn). But what do the bots think? Elf v1 agrees that playing the hane is better for black at 89%, but black is already very good and playing the empty corner for 7 is 85% and not a good whole board position for white. LZ #157 is far less critical: it thinks taking the empty corner and allowing thick atari gives black a small advantage (52%) compared to the empty board (46.5%) and agrees the hane is a little better (54%).

P.S. If you shift the entire top right corner down a line (so it started as a black 4-4 then 6-4 approach, attach etc, obviously black wouldn't tenuki that but hypothetically...) then you end up with a shape like an AI/O Meien big high shimari with a dumb attach inside that got laddered making the opponent stronger, and with that result of a bigger corner Elf prefers white slightly (52%).

Top
 Profile  
 
Online
 Post subject: Re: Leela Zero analysis of 'Making good shape' and other boo
Post #47 Posted: Mon Sep 03, 2018 7:55 am 
Honinbo

Posts: 8820
Liked others: 2602
Was liked: 3009
Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$B Oh, yeah? Tewari.
$$ +---------------------------------------+
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 . 2 . . |
$$ | . . . 3 . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . 1 . . . . . , . . . . . 5 . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ +---------------------------------------+[/go]


Does anyone think that Black is not better by a good bit?

Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$B Oh, yeah? Tewari.
$$ +---------------------------------------+
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O 7 O . . |
$$ | . . . X . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . X . . . . . , . . . . . X . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ +---------------------------------------+[/go]


Yes, this exchange is bad for Black. But surely only by a few points. Won't the White winrate of John Fairbairn's LZ be around 50% - 51%?

Edit: I reacted to the diagram and whole board evaluation without reading Uberdude's whole text.

Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$B Original diagram
$$ +---------------------------------------+
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 1 4 . . |
$$ | . . . 3 . . . . . , . . . . . , a . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . 7 . . . . . , . . . . . 5 . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ +---------------------------------------+[/go]


Yes, :b7: would have been better at "a". :) But that just means that :w6: was bad, and probably that :w4: was questionable, and maybe :w2: was, too. I defer to Uberdude and The Bots. :cool:

_________________
The Adkins Principle:

At some point, doesn't thinking have to go on?

— Winona Adkins

I think it's a great idea to talk during sex, as long as it's about snooker.

— Steve Davis

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Leela Zero analysis of 'Making good shape' and other boo
Post #48 Posted: Mon Sep 03, 2018 10:06 am 
Oza

Posts: 2352
Liked others: 15
Was liked: 3417
Quote:
Won't the White winrate of John Fairbairn's LZ be around 50% - 51%?



Yes - closer to 50% perhaps. But what was interesting also to me was that if you take away moves 7 and 8, White's winrate drops dramatically to 38%.

Since 7 and 8 essentially represent Black giving White an extra stone, this seems to mean that a single stone early in the opening can be measured at something 12 percentage points. Does this mean anything significant?

Bill said (talking about the overconcentration of the turtle-shell): "If I'm right, the next 7 pts. of territory are worth around 8 Leela Zero percentage pts." Does this marry up with the above?

Top
 Profile  
 
Online
 Post subject: Re: Leela Zero analysis of 'Making good shape' and other boo
Post #49 Posted: Mon Sep 03, 2018 11:09 am 
Honinbo

Posts: 8820
Liked others: 2602
Was liked: 3009
John Fairbairn wrote:
Quote:
Won't the White winrate of John Fairbairn's LZ be around 50% - 51%?



Yes - closer to 50% perhaps. But what was interesting also to me was that if you take away moves 7 and 8, White's winrate drops dramatically to 38%.

Since 7 and 8 essentially represent Black giving White an extra stone, this seems to mean that a single stone early in the opening can be measured at something 12 percentage points. Does this mean anything significant?

Bill said (talking about the overconcentration of the turtle-shell): "If I'm right, the next 7 pts. of territory are worth around 8 Leela Zero percentage pts." Does this marry up with the above?


If you are talking about :b7: and :w8: in the tewari diagram, and Leela rates the position after :w6: in that diagram at 38% for White, then my estimations are off. I did not rate White's three stone super shimari as that bad, nor the loss to Black of the :b7: - :w8: exchange.

Leela Zero's winrate estimates with your settings (and that of others I have seen) strikes me as close to rating one extra stone in the opening at around 16% difference, which is consistent with the statistics for pros and amateur dans in the 1970s. Elf's winrate estimates are more extreme, which reflects its estimation of its own ability, I suppose.

If you are talking about :b7: and :w8: in the book diagram, we are above my pay scale. ;)

_________________
The Adkins Principle:

At some point, doesn't thinking have to go on?

— Winona Adkins

I think it's a great idea to talk during sex, as long as it's about snooker.

— Steve Davis

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Leela Zero analysis of 'Making good shape' and other boo
Post #50 Posted: Mon Sep 03, 2018 3:35 pm 
Judan

Posts: 6072
Location: Cambridge, UK
Liked others: 345
Was liked: 3266
Rank: UK 4 dan
KGS: Uberdude 4d
OGS: Uberdude 7d
John Fairbairn wrote:
It's interesting, too, that in uberdude's investigion above, AI seems to be confirming we are right to put Fujisawa Hideyuki on a pedestal as another all-time great. Perhaps our judgements about the relative strengths of players are sound.


I wouldn't make any such conclusion yet, for starters I only looked at a few problems and haven't compared with problems of other pros. I explored a few more this evening:

- problem 65. Elf barely considers Shuko's solid connect suggestion, but it is at least better than the game move by a few percent. But both >10% worse than Elf's suggested tenuki to more open area of board. One of his aims is a subsequent forcing move and Elf agrees that's good and with some nice shape dodge moves in an example sequence.
- problem 66. Elf agrees with Shuko the game move was -12% soft (I got it right too, standard shape) and agrees with his moves for a longish sente sequence resulting in sacrifice of territory for thickness. But it thinks his gote defence at the end is a more significant (20%) mistake. Plus Elf says opponent wouldn't embark on the bad trade sequence but just dodge and play the local modern joseki.
- problem 67 (how to reduce a moyo). Elf says the game move Takao (white) played was not so bad and adjacent to the best move. Shuko's suggestion (in different area) was inbetween but his assumed sequence was indulgent reading with generally good white moves but many slack replies from black. Comment is "if 1 is exchanged for 2 it becomes a forcing move, doesn't it?" so he sees it as a good exchange but doesn't put enough effort into finding opponent's good resistance.
- problem 68 (continuation of moyo game with sabaki). Yuki played a soft (-12%) defence in response to a 2-space jump. Shuko wants to attach and cut it. Elf agrees cut is best, though gives extend as answer instead of hane to dodge the bad fight.
- 71 (how to answer a kick). In game the young pro headbutt adjacent stone (-10%) which Shuko criticised, he wants to play a fancy attachment inducing the descent move but Elf says it's terrible (-27%) and they aren't looking at the big picture and tenuki is best.


This post by Uberdude was liked by: Bill Spight
Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Leela Zero analysis of 'Making good shape' and other boo
Post #51 Posted: Tue Sep 04, 2018 4:19 am 
Honinbo

Posts: 8629
Liked others: 1485
Was liked: 1462
KGS: Kirby
Tygem: 커비라고해
John Fairbairn wrote:

But the proverb that the turtle-shell capture is worth 60 points seems way off. To give just an example starting with 4-4, as below, White's winrate shot up to 64.2%.



I initially tried the centre point as the extra White move to balance the number of stones played. I assumed* that that was the best way to negate Black's influence. But LZ preferred A or B (both around 62%).


I thought the turtle-back thing was relevant assuming that the turtle back was created by capturing two of the opponent's stones - similarly, by capturing a single stone for the ponnuki. To me, that's a lot different than just playing a ponnuki or turtle back shape without capturing stones.

Just playing, e.g., ponnuki without capturing isn't that efficient - but capturing the opponent's stone is.

_________________
it's be happy, not achieve happiness

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Leela Zero analysis of 'Making good shape' problems.
Post #52 Posted: Tue Sep 04, 2018 4:24 am 
Honinbo

Posts: 8629
Liked others: 1485
Was liked: 1462
KGS: Kirby
Tygem: 커비라고해
zermelo wrote:
I’ll reiterate my earlier conclusion: If a much stronger player says that something is good, you can trust that it is good enough for your games.


Why?

_________________
it's be happy, not achieve happiness

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Leela Zero analysis of 'Making good shape' and other boo
Post #53 Posted: Tue Sep 04, 2018 4:32 am 
Judan

Posts: 6072
Location: Cambridge, UK
Liked others: 345
Was liked: 3266
Rank: UK 4 dan
KGS: Uberdude 4d
OGS: Uberdude 7d
Kirby wrote:
I thought the turtle-back thing was relevant assuming that the turtle back was created by capturing two of the opponent's stones - similarly, by capturing a single stone for the ponnuki. To me, that's a lot different than just playing a ponnuki or turtle back shape without capturing stones.
Just playing, e.g., ponnuki without capturing isn't that efficient - but capturing the opponent's stone is.

If you count the stones in John's turtle example you will see 6 black and 4 white so presumably he did capture 2 white stones :)

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Leela Zero analysis of 'Making good shape' and other boo
Post #54 Posted: Tue Sep 04, 2018 4:34 am 
Honinbo

Posts: 8629
Liked others: 1485
Was liked: 1462
KGS: Kirby
Tygem: 커비라고해
Oh, sorry - my mistake. The position is still weird, because I prefer black here.

I guess there are quite a few white stones, but the turtle back gives me a lot of confidence.

_________________
it's be happy, not achieve happiness

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Leela Zero analysis of 'Making good shape' and other boo
Post #55 Posted: Tue Sep 04, 2018 5:05 am 
Honinbo

Posts: 8629
Liked others: 1485
Was liked: 1462
KGS: Kirby
Tygem: 커비라고해
As a side note, I also don't understand the seemingly implied conclusion that, because a bot is good at winning games, it implies that a bot is good at choosing moves from arbitrary positions. There are a couple of reasons I find this leap questionable:

1.) If a bot is "good enough" at evaluating board positions, a computer's search power can cause it to win games, even if it makes mistakes now and then.

2.) For any player, not or human, I'd guess that the quality of selected moves follow some distribution of quality, which isn't guaranteed to be uniform. For example, some moves may be super good and others may be just average or maybe even bad.

Given the above, I find this exercise useful for considering new alternatives, but it'd be a mistake to accept what the bots choose as gospel.

Maybe this is the same view that others already hold, but I wanted to express it clearly here.

That being said, a bot is more likely to be correct than me at any arbitrary position - I'll concede that :-)

_________________
it's be happy, not achieve happiness


This post by Kirby was liked by: Bill Spight
Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Leela Zero analysis of 'Making good shape' and other boo
Post #56 Posted: Tue Sep 04, 2018 5:29 am 
Dies with sente
User avatar

Posts: 71
Location: Warsaw, PL
Liked others: 143
Was liked: 17
Rank: EGF 8k
Universal go server handle: yakcyll
Kirby wrote:
Given the above, I find this exercise useful for considering new alternatives, but it'd be a mistake to accept what the bots choose as gospel.

In general, accepting the move choices of bots as superior without understanding why they are better is a mistake. It's already hard to follow certain plays made by pros; I suspect that those who choose to blindly imitate them have seen limited success in the past. The reason why bots' moves work is because they look much deeper than humans and can hold many more better evaluations of intermediate board positions for further analysis; plus, said evaluations are based on pure experience, as opposed to human intuition, gathered from millions of games. And besides, we have already seen examples where certain moves made by pros were overlooked for several thousands of playouts by bots, yet once played, they seemed just as good if not better than the bots' alternatives. I've been meaning to rant on this for a while now and it just keeps brewing.

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Leela Zero analysis of 'Making good shape' and other boo
Post #57 Posted: Tue Sep 04, 2018 5:31 am 
Oza

Posts: 2352
Liked others: 15
Was liked: 3417
Quote:
ponnuki without capturing isn't that efficient


Ponnuki without capturing is impossible. It's what the word means.

Quote:
Given the above, I find this exercise useful for considering new alternatives, but it'd be a mistake to accept what the bots choose as gospel.


Absolutely - bots lose to other bots after all, and occasionally even to humans.

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Leela Zero analysis of 'Making good shape' and other boo
Post #58 Posted: Tue Sep 04, 2018 6:46 am 
Gosei

Posts: 1402
Liked others: 691
Was liked: 457
Rank: AGA 3k KGS 1k Fox 1d
GD Posts: 61
KGS: dfan
Kirby wrote:
As a side note, I also don't understand the seemingly implied conclusion that, because a bot is good at winning games, it implies that a bot is good at choosing moves from arbitrary positions. There are a couple of reasons I find this leap questionable:

1.) If a bot is "good enough" at evaluating board positions, a computer's search power can cause it to win games, even if it makes mistakes now and then.

2.) For any player, not or human, I'd guess that the quality of selected moves follow some distribution of quality, which isn't guaranteed to be uniform. For example, some moves may be super good and others may be just average or maybe even bad.

Also, 3.) a Zero bot isn't guaranteed to have seen positions very similar to this arbitrary one in the self-play corpus that it has learned from, especially if the position being evaluated is pretty wacky.


This post by dfan was liked by: Bill Spight
Top
 Profile  
 
Online
 Post subject: Re: Leela Zero analysis of 'Making good shape' and other boo
Post #59 Posted: Tue Sep 04, 2018 7:53 am 
Honinbo

Posts: 8820
Liked others: 2602
Was liked: 3009
dfan wrote:
Kirby wrote:
As a side note, I also don't understand the seemingly implied conclusion that, because a bot is good at winning games, it implies that a bot is good at choosing moves from arbitrary positions. There are a couple of reasons I find this leap questionable:

1.) If a bot is "good enough" at evaluating board positions, a computer's search power can cause it to win games, even if it makes mistakes now and then.

2.) For any player, not or human, I'd guess that the quality of selected moves follow some distribution of quality, which isn't guaranteed to be uniform. For example, some moves may be super good and others may be just average or maybe even bad.

Also, 3.) a Zero bot isn't guaranteed to have seen positions very similar to this arbitrary one in the self-play corpus that it has learned from, especially if the position being evaluated is pretty wacky.


The position doesn't even have to be all that wacky. IIUC, the more any bot is trained by millions of games of self play, the more it has been trained on high level positions played in its style. How many of those positions are going to be similar to those that I face at move 75? The stronger the bot gets, the less similar its training positions will be to my games, n'est-çe pas?

Currently, bots are being trained to play better. I.e., to "solve" go starting from an empty board with a 7.5 komi by area scoring. Some are being trained for handicap games and different komi, as well. Producing better bots for those conditions is a fine thing in itself.

However, if I am going to use a bot to help me make better choices from the positions that I face, I would like it to be trained on those positions, or very similar positions. At some point, for human positions at any given level of play, as bots trained on self play continue to improve, we will reach the point of diminishing returns for evaluating those positions, since the bots' self play will not produce similar positions. It may be true that over time, bots will approach perfect play from an empty board with 7.5 komi, but that play may produce few positions like those produced in human games. The main reason that they do so today is that humans are imitating the bots. ;)

To train bots for the purpose of coaching humans perhaps it would be good to train them on games (self play is OK, I think) starting from various positions taken from human games. If each training regime starts with sampling human games from go servers, then training positions will not diverge over time from those faced by humans. :)

_________________
The Adkins Principle:

At some point, doesn't thinking have to go on?

— Winona Adkins

I think it's a great idea to talk during sex, as long as it's about snooker.

— Steve Davis

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Leela Zero analysis of 'Making good shape' and other boo
Post #60 Posted: Tue Sep 04, 2018 2:42 pm 
Lives in gote

Posts: 412
Liked others: 1
Was liked: 114
Rank: KGS 2k
GD Posts: 100
KGS: Tryss
Quote:
The position doesn't even have to be all that wacky. IIUC, the more any bot is trained by millions of games of self play, the more it has been trained on high level positions played in its style. How many of those positions are going to be similar to those that I face at move 75? The stronger the bot gets, the less similar its training positions will be to my games, n'est-çe pas?

But these deep neural networks are good at this kind of generalization. Even if you create an unnatural position (but equal and not a 120 moves deep tsumego), it will still play sensible moves.

Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 67 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  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