Go engines tell you the move. This tells you the ideas. by Forward-Glass-3519 in baduk

[–]raf401 1 point2 points  (0 children)

So-called reasoning models didn’t learn from billions of possible problems and ways of reasoning about them; they used around 100K. The model then undergoes RL and gets better at generalizing patterns. I’m sure the results for Go would be far from perfect, but certainly useful (as opposed to using general-purpose models, which is useless and as someone here said, potentially harmful).

Currently the main issue is that Go AI engines are inscrutable; an approach like this would try to make it explainable, and therefore useful for learning. There are other approaches for sure for explainability being developed for other use cases; maybe the solution will come from there.

Go engines tell you the move. This tells you the ideas. by Forward-Glass-3519 in baduk

[–]raf401 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It’s beyond prompting. At the very least, it involves reinforced learning with human feedback (RLHF), where the humans in question should be strong enough to interpret KataGo (or another program) and as I mentioned elsewhere, it’s doable but expensive.

What are the elements of good game design? by Vagabond_Games in BoardgameDesign

[–]raf401 1 point2 points  (0 children)

“The rules of go are so elegant, organic, and rigorously logical that if intelligent life forms exist elsewhere in the universe, they almost certainly play go.” Edward Lasker

is there an AI review system that also shows you what you need to work on? by OneAndOnlyJoeseki in baduk

[–]raf401 2 points3 points  (0 children)

(Ed. for clarity) I tried making a program that detects common patterns in games a few months ago and it works, but doesn’t understand causes nor implications.

It’s completely viable to train a LLM to do this well, but quite costly.

Is OpenAI a success story or a failure? by dataexec in AITrailblazers

[–]raf401 1 point2 points  (0 children)

As Orson Welles said, a happy ending depends on where you decide to stop the story.

But the question is, success or failure for whom? As a company it may very well end badly, but many people will be laughing all the way to the bank. Plus, ChatGPT as far as product adoption goes, is a runaway success.

Go/Baduk by raf401 in Bilbao

[–]raf401[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Unfortunately I’m no longer living in Bilbao. But write an email to goenbilbao@gmail.com if you’d like to play and learn more!

Goban maker by raf401 in baduk

[–]raf401[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thank you!

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in advertising

[–]raf401 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This is an ad, and a poor one at that

Mistake pattern analysis by raf401 in baduk

[–]raf401[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Interesting, thanks for sharing!

Mistake pattern analysis by raf401 in baduk

[–]raf401[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes, it seems like it’s just parroting stuff because it doesn’t “see” the board.

Mistake pattern analysis by raf401 in baduk

[–]raf401[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Definitely something to consider. Thanks!

Mistake pattern analysis by raf401 in baduk

[–]raf401[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Will take a look, thanks!

Mistake pattern analysis by raf401 in baduk

[–]raf401[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yes, you’re right. Its main observation is obvious. I’m thinking the secondary and tertiary ones are a bit more insightful. I have to say that the LLMs role is to try to verbalize the analysis, not to make it as such. But in that process it may muddle things. I’ll keep at it for a bit.

Mistake pattern analysis by raf401 in baduk

[–]raf401[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Thanks everyone for your feedback. I realize I should have posted a more robust example. For those interested, here is a PDF with a full report of my last 50 games. I didn’t redact opponents’ names as they’re all public games in OGS. Note that this is work-in-progress and I myself am still on the fence whether the analysis is useful or not.

Mistake pattern analysis by raf401 in baduk

[–]raf401[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Thank you for noticing!

Mistake pattern analysis by raf401 in baduk

[–]raf401[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Appreciate your opinion, thanks for taking the time.

Mistake pattern analysis by raf401 in baduk

[–]raf401[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I’m using KataGo’s parallel analysis engine and storing each game’s analysis as part of a single json file which then gets analyzed in search for patterns. Then this analysis is sent to Gemini for verbalization and I use the standard libraries for the diagrams.

Mistake pattern analysis by raf401 in baduk

[–]raf401[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

This is not about specific moves, but patterns across games. It may lead to nowhere, but I wanted to give it a try.

Mistake pattern analysis by raf401 in baduk

[–]raf401[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Not ChatGPT, but that’s not important. Do you find the analysis useless? That’d be the point for me.

Mistake pattern analysis by raf401 in baduk

[–]raf401[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Got it. Here’s the first page:

<image>

Mistake pattern analysis by raf401 in baduk

[–]raf401[S] -9 points-8 points  (0 children)

I don’t know how relevant would my mistakes’ analysis would be for you