In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Don Dailey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
writes
Michael Williams wrote:
It is a very nice graph. I wish we could see the next 11 doublings.
You and me both!
Just a couple of other comments:
The graph was smoothed with gnuplot's smooth bezier function - but the
raw graph looks very similar - just a little more jagged.
And you erased the data points themselves. I would consider the raw
data points much more informative than a curve that has been fitted to
them. Can we please see the graph with the data points left in?
Nick
If you straighten out the line - you get about 160 ELO per doubling,
just looking at the graph. This is being a bit conservative and
rounding down. I am pretty confident that you would continue to get
well over 100 per doubling for many more doublings and that this curve
would gradually taper off.
I am also confident that if we could run this at 5 or 6 more doublings
and play 9x9 matches and this could be done at a reasonable time
control, the program would give high dan players a difficult
time. This is one of those claims that sounds ludicrous to most
players probably. But when chess programs were only 2000 ELO
strength, projections were made about what it would take to play
grandmaster strength. Those projections were laughed at because nobody
believed such a silly thing could happen, but if anything the
projections were conservative and by no means exaggerated. It
actually happened very quickly due to Moores law. The programs
responded dutifully to each new generation of computer with about 80 ELO
per doubling or so.
Computers are now our masters in chess - matches are only given now with
handicaps so that the humans will have a chance. The big surprise is
that a doubling is STILL worth about 60 ELO points, the curve seems to
be tapering off but it's very gradual. I expect exactly the same in
computer go. This assumes the laws of physics and our ingenuity can
keep Moores law working for a few more doubling's!
I also did enough of a study on 19x19 UCT GO programs to see that the
improvement is substantial. It seems to be at least as much as in
9x9. I don't expect the 19x19 curve to taper off for a very long
time and I am confident that if Moores law can hang on for just a few
more years, we will also be seeing at least mid dan go programs
playing 19x19 Go in a few years - assuming they are playing about 3 kyu
now and don't improve.
Of course a little ingenuity on our part could speed this up!
- Don
Don Dailey wrote:
I found the graph, but I can't find the data and the details, although
it will be on one of the postings. I think this was at least a year
ago, perhaps 2.
Here is what I remember:
I played 11 different levels, each a doubling of the previous. The
weakest level I think was just 1024 play-outs. I ran the study for
weeks in order to get substantial data points even from the highest
levels. The highest level, took a significant time to play a single
game, several times longer than the CGOS time control which was 10
minutes at the time.
The conditions were CGOS 9x9 conditions - komi 7.5, and so on, just
like CGOS 9x9.
I actually tested 2 basic versions, one with heavy play-outs and one
with light play-outs. The light play-out version basically plays
random games.
Both programs were reasonably strong UCT programs - versions of Lazarus
which probably would play at least 2100 strength on my current computer
on the current 5 minute server.
See if this link works to see the graph:
http://greencheeks.homelinux.org:8015/~drd/study.jpg
The X axis represents the number of doublings and ELO ratings are on the
Y axis.
- Don
Michael Williams wrote:
Don Dailey wrote:
Mark,
I wasn't stating a precise value for a doubling when I said 100
ELO. But it appears that it is actually worth a bit more than 100
ELO for a
doubling. I did a massive study of this at one point a year or
more ago with thousands of games with UCT based Lazarus program and
the
strength improvement per doubling was very clear and impressive.
Don, what komi did you use when you did that study? Looking in the
archives, all I can find is you saying that komi=9 is correct. So
does that mean 8.5 or 9.5? Or did you allow draws?
_______________________________________________
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/
_______________________________________________
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/
--
Nick Wedd [EMAIL PROTECTED]
_______________________________________________
computer-go mailing list
computer-go@computer-go.org
http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
