It looks like computers are scalable - I know my UCT based program
responds
quite well to extra time.
So to make the test of whether humans are scalable, we simply do this:
1. Get a strong scalable go program.
2. Measure it's skill at various time controls.
3. Pit humans (who are roughly equal in skill) at the same
exact time controls.
4. See if humans can keep up.
If humans can keep up, they are improving just as rapidly as the
computers with extra time.
If I am correct, the humans will do just as well or even better
at longer time controls.
If you guys are correct thinking the nature of the game is such that
humans cannot improve with time, then the computers will pull
ahead more and more at longer time controls.
What do you think will happen? Do you believe that computers are
actually more effective at utilizing extra time in 19x19 go? I
think you are wrong.
Wouldn't that be crazy if it turned out that humans improve more in
chess with time but are incapable of improving at go and that
computers are actually superior in this regard for GO?
- Don
On Sun, 2007-01-21 at 14:57 -0800, terry mcintyre wrote:
> A lot of this interesting discussion has been about whether humans can
> make use of extra time. Some participants ( such as Dave Devos )
> believe that, after a certain point, humans cannot
> improve their rank, at least not linearly with respect to time
> alloted. Fair enough; we humans require sleep, and we are not
> particularly good at sustaining complex thought over long periods,
> especially when a great deal of memorization is required.
>
> But this is a "computer go" list. How about computers? Can a computer
> make effective use of long time controls? We can actually experiment
> with two computer opponents with different time controls and know that
> ( unless the programs are devised to "ponder" on their opponent's
> clock ), one program will have x time, the other 10x to work with.
> Given sufficient time and resources, we could give an approximate
> answer to the question "for a given computer program, an x-fold
> increase in thinking time will yield y elo points improvement."
>
> Of course, we'll also have to consider memory limitations. Some
> programs will gain little from extra time; some will run into memory
> limits before the clock expires; others may be more scalable.
>
> As for my own human anecdote, I am slowly making some progress from
> about 8kyu AGA to 6kyu AGA or thereabouts. I've always been stronger
> at tactics than strategy, making the most progress in the middle game.
> One method which has helped me win quite a few games against dan-level
> players, at handicaps smaller than the difference in our ranks would
> indicate, is to deliberately muddy the waters, to make the games as
> complex as possible, with numerous battles which intersect with each
> other.
>
> Dan-level players outmanuever me strategically, and almost always
> out-read me on any individual battle - but when the waters are muddied
> enough, they'll lose focus and spend a lot more time per move. I do
> think on my opponents' time, and by the time he works out a move, I
> already have a good counterplay lined up. All I need is one lapse, one
> tesuji to yank 20 or 30 points from my opponents - enough turn the
> tables. Unfortunately, I lack the strategic depth; if my opponent can
> stay cool and not make errors, I'll not be able to upset him.
>
> Which leads me to wonder if, at some future date when enough
> processors and memory are available, go programs might be able to
> leverage the advantage of depth of reading and sufficient memory to
> handle complex interactions into winning strategies.
>
> By the way, for those of you developing in Java, Azul Systems has
> created a custom JVM with 48 processors on a single chip, and a few
> other tweaks which look real promising:
> http://www.azulsystems.com
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________________
> Never miss an email again!
> Yahoo! Toolbar alerts you the instant new Mail arrives.Check it out.
> _______________________________________________
> computer-go mailing list
> computer-go@computer-go.org
> http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
_______________________________________________
computer-go mailing list
computer-go@computer-go.org
http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
