spookystats

3 lata temudiscuss

I've implemented this system for a while, but ultimately will switch to a less hierarchical one at some point in the future. Search, especially fuzzy search, is actually great! Using fzf in my terminal I can easily cd into any directory I desire as long as it or one of its parents has a sensible name.

spookystats

3 lata temudiscuss

Actually it does, because MC integration works due to the law of large numbers - exactly what is presented in the article.

spookystats

4 lata temudiscuss

Did not respond is indeed a legitimate result, however (as the blog points out) if the non-responders differ from the responders then every evaluation you do on the responders will be biased.

For example, if you ask students about their satisfaction with teaching, I'd guess that students with a bad experience are more likely to reply to your survey. Based on the data you gathered you will think that the teaching at the uni is worse than it really is.

spookystats

4 lata temudiscuss

I understand the top comment as follows: The AIs were trained under one set of rules (remove obvious dead stones from your territory before counting) but are judged (in the paper) by another set of rules (if you have one opposing stone in your territory, that territory does not count).

Thus its no surprise that the AI can be attacked in this way: if you would apply the set of rules that it was trained with, all games from the paper would result in a (huge!) win for the AI.

spookystats

4 lata temudiscuss

Having played Go myself I am kind of confused about these results: In a human vs. human game the "victim" would win in all scenarios presented in the paper as the attackers stones would be removed or, if there is disagreement, the situation would be played until both parties agree.

That makes me wonder: was KataGo maybe trained on a different set of rules than the ones used in this paper? If so, it seems that the attack is "unfair" because it exploits a blind spot that comes from changing the rules of the game.

comments