DeepZenGo thread

[lichigo]

Deepzen is on tygem, it is not new but the 20th october tygem announced that deepzen will play for a year and available 24/7.
Since the 20th deepzen played (at the moment) 56 games and lost only 2 (22 and 35 wins in a row). Far to win 60 games in a row or the perfect like Master I think deepzen is an excellent sparring partner. Some players tried to play some alphago zero moves or openings.
Deepzen won agaisnt a lot of strong pros included Park Jeongwhan and some young chinese pros.
Hope we can share some moves and ideas. I think we can also learn from Deepzen ( sometimes it is copying some of the Alphago moves).

[Uberdude]

Zen made what looks like a pretty basic life and death mistake in the game it's currently playing against Sada Atsushi and I think it might lose given some typical Monte carlo tilt suicide moves. The hane below should be placement one to the right to avoid black's throw in and ko for life. I keenly remember this shape as I made the same mistake in one of my online BIBA league games (and indeed I lost the game from this ko aji). It's not a totally unconditional mistake in that the hane does have some advantages, such as black being less likely to peep the outside cutting point of the wall because white could play atari at b3 and that destroys the ko whilst building eyeshape, and the j3 cut means the group isn't totally dead yet, but isn't this a big mistake seeing as black got the 3 marked tenukis out of the sacrifice so leaving a ko seems bad?

$$Wc DeepZenGo (white) vs Sada Atsushi 3p
$$ +---------------------------------------+
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . # . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . X . . . . . . . X . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . , . . . . . , X . . |
$$ | . . . . . # . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . S . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , O . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . O O O . . . . . , . . . . . X . . . |
$$ | . . X X O O O O . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . O X . X X X X O . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ +---------------------------------------+

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$Wc DeepZenGo (white) vs Sada Atsushi 3p
$$ +---------------------------------------+
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . # . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . X . . . . . . . X . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . , . . . . . , X . . |
$$ | . . . . . # . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . S . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , O . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . O O O . . . . . , . . . . . X . . . |
$$ | . . X X O O O O . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . O X . X X X X O . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ +---------------------------------------+[/go]

[lichigo]

I saw this shape a lot and deepzen is always playing the hane.

[Uberdude]

I saw this shape a lot and deepzen is always playing the hane.

Interesting: I wonder if the humans are playing this sequence on purpose knowing Zen has a habit of making a mistake to get an early advantage. Or maybe this mistake is not as bad as black's invading and then dying that it's still actually ok for white overall.

Zen won by 2.5 anyway...

[moha]

Zen made what looks like a pretty basic life and death mistake in the game it's currently playing against Sada Atsushi

This may be related to the other LD mistake discussed earlier here. The error may came from the NN and the placement probably wasn't searched at all, or at least not with sufficient effort to understand the consequences. I wonder how the network ranked that move.

[Shenoute]

I've had a look at DEEPZEN(B)'s account on Tygem, it currently stands at 2598 wins and 632 losses. It played a lot until July 27th and was losing several games each day (4W-4L on the 27th, 16W-4L on the 26th for instance). After July 27th, it stopped playing and only came back the day before yesterday, October 20th. Since then it has lost only two games (71W-2L).

As these games do not seem to be available anywhere except Tygem and cannot be downloaded there, I replayed them and created sgf files of the two losses. I haven't looked at them in detail yet but something weird seems to have taken place in the game against TuTu (I entered the result as given on Tygem).

[Uberdude]

I believe tcmh is Tong MengCheng 6p, one of the top Chinese pros just behind the top tier of world champions, but can beat them on a good day; currently goratings #32. First game looks like Zen misunderstood the dead big eye? That's the kind of thing that's very rare to actually happen in a real game, but a 20 kyu learns in a book. So maybe a gap in its knowledge (and the large number of external liberties means the tree search doesn't kill it). I wonder how AlphaGo Zero deals/learnt with such things.

[moha]

First game looks like Zen misunderstood the dead big eye? That's the kind of thing that's very rare to actually happen in a real game, but a 20 kyu learns in a book. So maybe a gap in its knowledge (and the large number of external liberties means the tree search doesn't kill it). I wonder how AlphaGo Zero deals/learnt with such things.

I think dead shapes are to be recognised by the net(s), the search wouldn't normally kill/capture them anyway since that would not be a good line. You may be right with gap in knowledge in this case, but on second thought the earlier corner placement doesn't seem like something the net could miss or rank too low, so maybe both moves was searched but not deep enough to understand the ko? Or there may also be a bug somewhere.

About AG it is pure speculation, but I think it is more search oriented or at least has much deeper and more accurate searches (esp. zero with its huge speedup). Also the randomized training of zero probably covers rare shapes like this as well. And of course, even AG has shown a tactical artifact once.

[Bill Spight]

It is important to remember that the current crop of strong go programs do not rely much upon logic. Logic only comes into the picture when they can read the game out, which they cannot, until maybe near the end of play. Their search is probably good enough so that they could read out difficult life and death positions locally, but they do not use local search, it's all global search. For instance, human beginners can learn basic ladders because they can be deduced by logic, but it took AlphaGo Zero a long time to learn basic ladders, and it probably does not know them perfectly, not to mention the complex ladders of some problems.

This kind of example makes me more inclined to think that a team of human plus super-human program may well be better than the super-human program alone.

[pookpooi]

This kind of example makes me more inclined to think that a team of human plus super-human program may well be better than the super-human program alone.

I heard that it goes opposite way in chess, but chess and go are completely different things.
But everyone already knows about DeepZen vs. Kong Jie + CGI match, we need more games like this though before conclude anything. Plus CGI is not on the super-human level yet (it's playing on Tygem right now and is only as strong as Leela)

[moha]

This kind of example makes me more inclined to think that a team of human plus super-human program may well be better than the super-human program alone.

I heard that it goes opposite way in chess, but chess and go are completely different things.
But everyone already knows about DeepZen vs. Kong Jie + CGI match

Actually I'm interested in the same thing but with a slight difference: instead of a human using an AI as assistance (for tactical verification or as an idea source etc.), the other way may prove to be more effective.

So a human pro would take the evaluation of the AI, and usually let it through. Only if the pick has a bad feeling in it from a human strategic point, going against principles, strange choice of direction etc. (basically, a potential horizont effect) AND the second or third pick of the AI is not much lower in winrate but looks more healthy, would the human intervene. I would be very surprised if this kind of filtering would not raise the strength - but at least it should not lower it.

[Bill Spight]

This kind of example makes me more inclined to think that a team of human plus super-human program may well be better than the super-human program alone.

I heard that it goes opposite way in chess, but chess and go are completely different things.

Well, what I heard about chess was different. Maybe how the team works is different. I mean that the human considers the top plays suggested by the program, along with their evaluations, and decides on the actual play, which may not be one of the program's suggestions. By contrast, a team where the program makes some plays and the human makes others would almost surely be weaker than the machine alone. Anyway, the human-machine team could always be as good as the machine alone if the human always chooses the machine's favored play.

[Uberdude]

Zen is also pretty good at 5-in-a-row

$$W
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , .
$$ | . . X . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . 4 . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . 3 X 2 . . . . . . .
$$ | . . 1 . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . O . X . . . , .
$$ | . . . . 5 6 . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . 7 8 . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . .
$$ +----------------------

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$W
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , .
$$ | . . X . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . 4 . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . 3 X 2 . . . . . . .
$$ | . . 1 . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . O . X . . . , .
$$ | . . . . 5 6 . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . 7 8 . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . .
$$ +----------------------[/go]

[pookpooi]

Now can DeepZen take on GodMoves when (s)he play seriously? #AskingTheRealQuestion #RevengeMatch #AnonymousPlayer

[Shenoute]

Team human scored 4 wins today (for 20 losses), a marked improvement over the previous days. One of these however was on two stones, making it maybe less surprising but no less interesting.



The other three games are equally interesting I feel. The one against 5353 features large exchanges on the right side in the beginning and two simultaneous ko in the end where only Deepzen played threats.



In the game against KeA, Deepzen seems to have misread(?) something in the upper right (move 138!) and also the semeai at the end.