I frequently use "Move 37" as a shorthand for "AI that comes up with creative, highly effective ideas that no human would ever consider." Often the implication is that reinforcement learning (as used in AlphaGo) has some "secret sauce" that could never be replicated by imitation learning.

But I realize that I don't know the details of Move 37 very well, other than secondhand accounts from Go experts of how "groundbreaking" it was. I've never played Go, and I have basically no knowledge of the rules or strategies beyond the most basic descriptions. Considering how influential Move 37 is on my views about AI, it seems like I'd better try to understand what was so special about it.

I'd be interested in an explanation that builds up the necessary understanding from the ground up. This could look like: "Read this tutorial on the rules of Go, study these wiki pages about specific concepts and strategies, look at these example games, and finally read my explanation of Move 37 which uses everything you've learned."

Extremely ambitiously, after reading this explanation, I'd be able to look at a series of superficially similar Go boards, distinguish whether it might be a good idea to do a Move-37-like play, identify where exactly to move if so, and explain my answer. That may be unrealistic to achieve in a short time, but I'd be interested in getting as close as possible. An easier version of that challenge would use heavily-annotated Go boards that abstract away some parts of the necessary cognition, with notes like "this section of the board is very important to control" or "this piece has property A" or "these pieces are in formation B."^[1]

If part of the explanation is "when you do an extensive Monte Carlo Tree Search from this board state guided by XYZ heuristics, Move 37 turns out to be the best move," that seems like a pretty good explanation to me—as long as the search tree is small enough that it plausibly could have been explored by AlphaGo during its match with Lee Sedol. I'm mainly interested in trying to understand the intuition behind Move 37 in the way AlphaGo might have "understood" it. If the move couldn't be found by a human without using brute force search, that would be valuable to know.

I'm particularly interested in an explanation of Move 37 because I want to know whether such an explanation is even possible. When we have superintelligent AI solving r...

ronak69

ronak69

ronak69

A Teacher vs. Everyone Else

ronak69

ronak69

ronak69

A Teacher vs. Everyone Else