Go VS Chess


  • 4 months ago · Quote · #341

    petrip

    There has been go reseatrch all the way to sixties. Progress has judt been very slow. And success really requred amount of computing  power that would have been impractical even 1997. 

    Let alone the very basic idea of how to do chess program really did not change during that 40 years. While in most avenues had to be abandoned since they were dead ends

  • 4 months ago · Quote · #342

    Polar_Bear

    Arisktotle wrote:
    Polar_Bear schreef

    Conclusion:

    Go is far easier for algorithmical compression than chess and prior to 1997, nobody gave a shit about computer Go.

    It took 40 years (1957 - 1997) and best IT scientist's effort to beat human champion in chess.

    It took only 19 years (1997 - 2016) and amateurish research to beat human Go champion.

    For a minimum truth, let's say: It took only 19 years (1997 - 2016) and amateurish research on top of 40 years (1957 - 1997) and best IT scientist's effort to beat human Go champion

    OK, let's be more precise.

    First complete chess program appeared in 1941, and human champion lost in 1997.*

    56 years

    First complete Go program appeared in 1968, and human champion lost in 2016.**

    48 years


     

    *Kasparov was declining already, underestimating artificial opponent, and there may have been a few GMs more competent (Anand, Shirov, Karpov).

    **Very few of elite programmers were ever focused on Go.

  • 4 months ago · Quote · #343

    SaintGermain32105

    It's more like - money for nothing vs nothing for money -.

  • 4 months ago · Quote · #344

    DORAEMONCHESS

    Arisktotle wrote:
    Polar_Bear schreef

    Conclusion:

    Go is far easier for algorithmical compression than chess and prior to 1997, nobody gave a shit about computer Go.

    It took 40 years (1957 - 1997) and best IT scientist's effort to beat human champion in chess.

    It took only 19 years (1997 - 2016) and amateurish research to beat human Go champion.

    For a minimum truth, let's say: It took only 19 years (1997 - 2016) and amateurish research on top of 40 years (1957 - 1997) and best IT scientist's effort to beat human Go champion

    Now, that's the right information. 

  • 4 months ago · Quote · #345

    0110001101101000

    petrip wrote:

    Many avenues had to be abandoned since they weren't interested in actual AI

    FTFY

  • 4 months ago · Quote · #346

    0110001101101000

    Polar_Bear wrote:
    Arisktotle wrote:
    Polar_Bear schreef

    Conclusion:

    Go is far easier for algorithmical compression than chess and prior to 1997, nobody gave a shit about computer Go.

    It took 40 years (1957 - 1997) and best IT scientist's effort to beat human champion in chess.

    It took only 19 years (1997 - 2016) and amateurish research to beat human Go champion.

    For a minimum truth, let's say: It took only 19 years (1997 - 2016) and amateurish research on top of 40 years (1957 - 1997) and best IT scientist's effort to beat human Go champion

    OK, let's be more precise.

    First complete chess program appeared in 1941, and human champion lost in 1997.*

    56 years

    First complete Go program appeared in 1968, and human champion lost in 2016.**

    48 years


     

    *Kasparov was declining already, underestimating artificial opponent, and there may have been a few GMs more competent (Anand, Shirov, Karpov).

    **Very few of elite programmers were ever focused on Go.

    Yeah, chess programs weren't much stronger than the best humans until years later. There were some matches drawn in the mid 2000s.

  • 4 months ago · Quote · #347

    petrip

    and to put into  context. Hardware needed to beat Lee Sedol

    The version of AlphaGo that played against Lee used a similar amount of computing power as in the match against Fan Hui,[29] where it used 1,202 CPUs and 176 GPUs.[11]

     

    Long long time anyone can get pro-level opponent onthe home computer


Back to Top

Post your reply: