Life In 19x19

Here's one of my favorites:

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$B
$$ ---------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . X . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . , . . . . . O . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

Alphago wants to invade the 3-3 right away, perhaps no surprise.

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$Bcm1
$$ ---------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . X . . . . . . . . . . . 7 6 . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . X 8 . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . , . . . . . O . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

Can one of you clever people tell me what it means that the keima jump is the only choice for black here?

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$B
$$ ---------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . X . . . . . . . . . . . X O . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . X O . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X O . . |
$$ | . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . X O . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . a . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . , . . . . . O . . . |
$$ | . . b . . . . . . . . . . . . . c . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

It now shows a, b, and c within 1% of each other, with a slightly favored (45.3, 45.4, 45.9)

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$Bcm13
$$ ---------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . X . . . . . . . . . . . X O . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . X O . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X O . . |
$$ | . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . X O . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . , . . . . . O a . . |
$$ | . . . . . 2 . . . . . . . . . b 3 . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

Next a and b above have almost identical win rate (45.2, 45.3). Kind of wierd, are both directions equally good?
I'll just post a few of the followups below:

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$Bcm White High split
$$ ---------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . X . . . . . . . . . . . X O . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , O . . . . X O . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X O . . |
$$ | . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . X O . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X O . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . , . . . . O O O . . |
$$ | . . . . . O . . . . . . . O X X X . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$Wcm18 Fighting!
$$ ---------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . X . . . . . . . 4 . . . X O . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . 6 . 3 . . . . . X O . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X O . . |
$$ | . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . X O . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . 5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . 0 . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . X 8 . 9 . . . . . . . . . . . 2 . |
$$ | . . 7 . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 . . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . , . . . . . O X . . |
$$ | . . . . . O . . . . . . . . . O X . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$Wcm16 Black Invades lower left
$$ ---------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 4 5 . |
$$ | . . . X . . . . . . . . . . . X O . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , 3 . . . . X O . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X O . . |
$$ | . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 X O . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 6 . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . X O . . . . . , . . . . . O . . . |
$$ | . . X O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$Wcm16 Black Invades lower right
$$ ---------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . X . . . . . . . . . . . X O . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . 3 , 4 . . . . X O . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X O . . |
$$ | . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . X O . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 8 . . |
$$ | . . 5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 2 . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 . . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . , . . . . . O X . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . 6 . . . . . O X . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

In every case white takes sente after the 33 invasion and plays a 4th line split on the top.

In case anyone missed it, Haylee did a short video introduction to this tool. She seemed particularly interested in Alphago's unfavorable evaluation of the Kobayashi Fuseki.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CQTAKKCyORA

Hi Uberdude,

You might want to check the ISMA women's individual tournament game between Oh Yujin and Fujisawa Rina. They played a very similar opening with the Magic Sword joseki as shown in your earlier post. Oh Yujin obviously hasn't got a chance to try the AlphaGo tools. She played the normal human move and she lost the game (not necessarily because of that).

@macelee, yes I noticed that too! AG does like that large knight's move (well done Fujisawa Shuko was it who invented it?) as an inducing move to settling in the corner, but often declines to take the bait of cutting it. Although we can't say that attach was the losing move, the subsequent fighting spreading out on the top side was the deciding factor in the game and granddaughter Fujisawa played nicely there.

This opening book also includes all 60 of the online Master games with win rates and recommended variations, a real treasure trove for going back and re-reviewing those games. I started the first one here: viewtopic.php?p=226119#p226119.

Uberdude wrote:@macelee, yes I noticed that too! AG does like that large knight's move (well done Fujisawa Shuko was it who invented it?) as an inducing move to settling in the corner, but often declines to take the bait of cutting it.

Fujisawa Hosai invented it, as I recall.

I found this interesting, I thought Master didn't like those high side pincers too much, I don't understand why it chooses this, it's because right and left side value is too settled by white 10 and 12? Still I would expect F17 and just let white double approach

I've noticed that AlphaGo seems to operate very much like Mizokami's stone-counting theory. Superficially, at least, that's not surprise because we can make the assumption that counting something or other must be a major part of any computer player.

Applying it to the above position, the first step is to decide which half of the board to concentrate on. There are four halves, of course. In the lower half Black has 7 stones to White's 8, so he can't take an attacking posture there. But his weaknesses are not yet glaring enough to require urgent remedy, so this side can be left for the moment.

The left side is 3-2 in Black's favour but that allows on a mild attack and Black actually has nothing to attack there, so that side is very ignorable at present.

On the right side Black is on the wrong side of a 6-7 split and so is required to play a prudent move - R14 springs to mind. That can hardly be bad but perhaps runs the risk of being slack or forced (with weaknesses on the lower side, it seems foolish for Black to surrender the initiative to White so easily - and a White reply at K16 makes the left side 3-3 which seems to dull Black's prospects a great deal on that side).

On the top side Black has 2-1 split and so by M's theory can allow himself a modest attack. The kick at P17 is too aggressive - no back-up. F17 is not even an attack and is likewise initiative-surrendering. That leaves a pincer. Given the uncertain situation on the lower side a high pincer seems obvious. The only two modest attacks are K16 and L16, both of which make the right side a safe 7-7. K16 is the more modest attack but also creates a 4-2 situation on the almost virgin left side, which gives Black something to aspire to.

So by my reading Mizokami's method predicts K16, and although it took a while for me to type out, it can be found well within the 30 seconds he claims is all you need to evaluate positions. And even if the method's not quite as accurate as AlphaGo, it does, by my reckoning, tend towards finding the same sort of moves, and perhaps for an underlying similarly numerical reason.

Alpha seems to agree with most humans that the 4-4 and 3-4 points in the corners are key. So I decided to look at the openings where each side takes two corners at 3-4 or 4-4 in the first four moves and see what the extremes are. In other words, how badly can either side go wrong if they do this at random? The range is pretty small, all I've found are between 45% and 48% for B. Alpha's estimates aren't that precise here - almost every time I find a position where the win rate is near one of the extremes after four moves, when I play out Alpha's suggestions to the end the win rate is back right near the average or even swings to the opposite extreme. Two examples: the first starts off about as well for black as I could find, at 48%, but the continuation ends with B's win rate for at 46.9%, which is nothing special.



And here's an even more dramatic shift, which starts off with B's win rate at 47.4% and ends with B's win rate down to around 45%

kwhyte wrote:the first starts off about as well for black as I could find, at 48%, but the continuation ends with B's win rate for at 46.9%, which is nothing special.

What does this say about the infamous " lost the game"? Here it's actually and !

Looking through AlphaGo's judgements of the Master games I came across a shocking judgement in a common joseki where it prefers (by a lot) a crude bumping itself on head to the "good style" normal joseki. Here's the sequence from Master vs Shi Yue (a rare occurrence of Master as black playing the small shimari for an orthodox opening), note that before 1 black's win% as reported in the teaching tool was 44.6, a bit of a drop from the 47 at start (most of this seems to be Master/Aja not playing the e5 peep before pressing at top left, I think it wants to break ladder before continuing the joseki, I might analyse more in the Master review thread later). This right side pattern is very common in pro games over the last few years, Shi then continued with kick of 5 and Master ignored because if you extend white can pincer which is also a ladder breaker.

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$Wc AlphaGo Master (black) vs Shi Yue
$$ +---------------------------------------+
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . X . . . . . . . X . . O . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . , . . . . . X . O . |
$$ | . . . . . 6 . . . . . . . . . . X O . |
$$ | . . O . . . . . . . . . . . . X O 3 . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 1 2 . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . , . . . . . , X . . |
$$ | . . . . 5 X . . . . . . . . X . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ +---------------------------------------+[/go]

Instead of the hane of 1 above, which AlphaGo says is a huge mistake and launches white's win% by 8.7 up to 53.3, it wants to play this crude bumping and walking into double hane sequence (that low dans on Tygem seem to like, maybe they aren't so noob!), though it does interpose a cheeky peep, and then tenuki! if the tenuki is to b then it expects black to capture the 5 stone immediately, with a the area is left unplayed for the next dozen moves they give us.

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$Wc AG's recommendation
$$ +---------------------------------------+
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . X . . . . . . . X . . O . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . , . . . . . X . O . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 4 X O . |
$$ | . . O . . . . . . . . . . . . X O . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 1 . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X 5 . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . , . . . a . , X . . |
$$ | . . . . b X . . . . . . . . X . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ +---------------------------------------+[/go]

I then checked if this was a specific recommendation in this whole board position with the two approaches already played on the left, but it's not. It also says it with just 2 white 4-4s, here the hane boosts black by 7.4 to 52%. I wonder if it's the lack of a severe ladder breaker for white that makes it dislike the hane so much.

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$Wc AG's recommendation, plain double 4-4
$$ +---------------------------------------+
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . O . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . , . . . . . X . O . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 4 X O . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X O . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 1 . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X 5 . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . , . . . . . , X . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ +---------------------------------------+[/go]

Same thing with bottom left as 3-4, here its 7.7 difference: 51.5 vs 43.8.

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$Wc AG's recommendation, plain 4-4 and 3-4
$$ +---------------------------------------+
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . O . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . , . . . . . X . O . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 4 X O . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X O . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 1 . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X 5 . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , X . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . . . . . . X . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ +---------------------------------------+[/go]

So, any bets of the first pro to open themselves to ridicule and play this crude move just because AG said so? There was the similar crude bumping in the game vs Gu Li, which Kono Rin then copied.

Uberdude wrote:Looking through AlphaGo's judgements of the Master games I came across a shocking judgement in a common joseki where it prefers (by a lot) a crude bumping itself on head to the "good style" normal joseki.

Wow that is pretty interesting. I don't quite believe it...

Uberdude wrote:Here's the sequence from Master vs Shi Yue (a rare occurrence of Master as black playing the small shimari for an orthodox opening), note that before 1 black's win% as reported in the teaching tool was 44.6, a bit of a drop from the 47

That seems to be quite a drop off in winning percentage for black. The teaching tool advised a 3-3 invasion for black at move 9 and at move 11 leading to better winning percentage > 48%. If I remember correctly, those early 3-3 plays weren't seen during the Master series but only later when the selfplay games were published (after the Ke Jie match). It seems Master played in a more "orthodox" way then.

Baywa wrote:

Uberdude wrote:Here's the sequence from Master vs Shi Yue (a rare occurrence of Master as black playing the small shimari for an orthodox opening), note that before 1 black's win% as reported in the teaching tool was 44.6, a bit of a drop from the 47

That seems to be quite a drop off in winning percentage for black. The teaching tool advised a 3-3 invasion for black at move 9 and at move 11 leading to better winning percentage > 48%. If I remember correctly, those early 3-3 plays weren't seen during the Master series but only later when the selfplay games were published (after the Ke Jie match). It seems Master played in a more "orthodox" way then.

Yup, this teaching tool and the 50 self-play after Wuzhen are more 3-3 obsessed than Master at 2017 new year. There were a few earlyish 3-3s in the Master games (I'm planning to review the Gu Zihao one), but they were more like at move 29 than move 9. So I suspect although they say the teaching tool and 50 self-plays are AG Master version it's more like that version of the software design, but with more training so closer to AG's ultimate view of best play which is highly 3-3 obsessed. Another theory is when Aja was playing he had several move suggestions with win % from AG and chose not to go so 3-3 obsessed or play a small shimari for a change. Also Demis said they turned up the temperature parameter for the Master games so that would explain more variety of other moves not in the AG teach book, but not the total disappearance of the #1 choice move 10 3-3 invasions.

I think this 3-3 obsession is a bit of a shame really in the teaching tool, as so many positions its recommended mainline is just 15 moves of 3-3 invasions, which is not so interesting after the 100th time, and really it's the play after those sequences showing how the walls aren't so valuable that would be more instructive.

Kinda funny to see those old "greedyGo" BQM

https://senseis.xmp.net/?BQM83

https://senseis.xmp.net/?BQM133

Uberdude wrote:Looking through AlphaGo's judgements of the Master games I came across a shocking judgement in a common joseki where it prefers (by a lot) a crude bumping itself on head to the "good style" normal joseki. Here's the sequence from Master vs Shi Yue (a rare occurrence of Master as black playing the small shimari for an orthodox opening), note that before 1 black's win% as reported in the teaching tool was 44.6, a bit of a drop from the 47 at start (most of this seems to be Master/Aja not playing the e5 peep before pressing at top left, I think it wants to break ladder before continuing the joseki, I might analyse more in the Master review thread later). This right side pattern is very common in pro games over the last few years, Shi then continued with kick of 5 and Master ignored because if you extend white can pincer which is also a ladder breaker.

$$Wc AlphaGo Master (black) vs Shi Yue
$$ +---------------------------------------+
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . X . . . . . . . X . . O . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . , . . . . . X . O . |
$$ | . . . . . 6 . . . . . . . . . . X O . |
$$ | . . O . . . . . . . . . . . . X O 3 . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 1 2 . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . , . . . . . , X . . |
$$ | . . . . 5 X . . . . . . . . X . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ +---------------------------------------+

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$Wc AlphaGo Master (black) vs Shi Yue
$$ +---------------------------------------+
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . X . . . . . . . X . . O . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . , . . . . . X . O . |
$$ | . . . . . 6 . . . . . . . . . . X O . |
$$ | . . O . . . . . . . . . . . . X O 3 . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 1 2 . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . , . . . . . , X . . |
$$ | . . . . 5 X . . . . . . . . X . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ +---------------------------------------+[/go]

When I was learning to play go, I wondered about , but came away with the idea that it was the pro choice, as opposed to simply connecting at , even when the ladder works.

Instead of the hane of 1 above, which AlphaGo says is a huge mistake and launches white's win% by 8.7 up to 53.3, it wants to play this crude bumping and walking into double hane sequence (that low dans on Tygem seem to like, maybe they aren't so noob!), though it does interpose a cheeky peep, and then tenuki! if the tenuki is to b then it expects black to capture the 5 stone immediately, with a the area is left unplayed for the next dozen moves they give us.

$$Wc AG's recommendation
$$ +---------------------------------------+
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . X . . . . . . . X . . O . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . , . . . . . X . O . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 4 X O . |
$$ | . . O . . . . . . . . . . . . X O c . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 1 . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X 5 . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . , . . . a . , X . . |
$$ | . . . . b X . . . . . . . . X . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ +---------------------------------------+

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$Wc AG's recommendation
$$ +---------------------------------------+
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . X . . . . . . . X . . O . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . , . . . . . X . O . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 4 X O . |
$$ | . . O . . . . . . . . . . . . X O c . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 1 . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X 5 . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . , . . . a . , X . . |
$$ | . . . . b X . . . . . . . . X . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ +---------------------------------------+[/go]

I think that the "cheeky" peep is significant. It is a no loss kikashi. It induces bad shape by Black and does look better than the stone in the ladder in the other variation. I am surprised by how bad AlphaGo thinks that the hane is by comparison, but the peep is attractive. I am also surprised that AlphaGo prefers in this diagram to the solid connection at "c".