AlphaZero beats AlphaGo Zero, Stockfish, and Elmo

Discussion of anything and everything relating to chess playing software and machines.

Moderators: hgm, Rebel, chrisw

clumma
Posts: 186
Joined: Fri Oct 10, 2014 10:05 pm
Location: Berkeley, CA

Re: AlphaZero beats AlphaGo Zero, Stockfish, and Elmo

Post by clumma »

Lyudmil Tsvetkov wrote:Alpha had considerable hardware advantage
That comparison is not straightforward, but this claim does not seem to be true. SF had 64 threads. I'm not up on the latest scaling behavior of the engine but that has got to be near saturation.

-Carl
Milos
Posts: 4190
Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 1:47 am

Re: AlphaZero beats AlphaGo Zero, Stockfish, and Elmo

Post by Milos »

clumma wrote:
Daniel Shawul wrote:What is different is that alphazero's evaluation selects features of eval by itself (via a nerual network), while in the standard approach the programmer select features (e.g. passsed pawns, king safety, rook on open file etc) and just tunes the weights.
The other difference is that Alpha uses MCTS not alpha-beta. Paper says nps used in these games is only 80,000!

Also worth noting that Alpha trained for 4 hours, compared to many years of painstakingly tuning Stockfish!
4 hours my ass (pardon my french). Try training it on state-of-the-art 1080.
Fully trained network requres 12h on 5000 gen1 TPUs for self-games and 64 gen2 TPUs for training itself.
Gen1 TPU is like 30x K80 which is like 5x 1080 in performance.
So you'd need like 375k training days with 1080, which is like 1000 years!!!
MikeGL
Posts: 1010
Joined: Thu Sep 01, 2011 2:49 pm

Re: AlphaZero beats AlphaGo Zero, Stockfish, and Elmo

Post by MikeGL »

clumma wrote:
Lyudmil Tsvetkov wrote:Alpha had considerable hardware advantage
... but that has got to be near saturation.

-Carl
Excellent point.

I mean at that hardware, there won't be any fluctuation on the best candidate move by SF8 anyway.
Rémi Coulom
Posts: 438
Joined: Mon Apr 24, 2006 8:06 pm

Re: AlphaZero beats AlphaGo Zero, Stockfish, and Elmo

Post by Rémi Coulom »

Milos wrote:4 hours my ass (pardon my french). Try training it on state-of-the-art 1080.
Fully trained network requres 12h on 5000 gen1 TPUs for self-games and 64 gen2 TPUs for training itself.
Gen1 TPU is like 30x K80 which is like 5x 1080 in performance.
So you'd need like 375k training days with 1080, which is like 1000 years!!!
Your math is wrong. I think it is doable with a distributed effort smaller than what was used for Stockfish.
Lyudmil Tsvetkov
Posts: 6052
Joined: Tue Jun 12, 2012 12:41 pm

Re: AlphaZero beats AlphaGo Zero, Stockfish, and Elmo

Post by Lyudmil Tsvetkov »

clumma wrote:
Lyudmil Tsvetkov wrote:Alpha had considerable hardware advantage
That comparison is not straightforward, but this claim does not seem to be true. SF had 64 threads. I'm not up on the latest scaling behavior of the engine but that has got to be near saturation.

-Carl
From what I gleaned from hardware comparisons, the advantage is 16/1.
Why would one want to run a similar very unfair match?
Only one thing comes to mind: that the company will want to advertise its colossal breakthrough with TPUs and artificial intelligence and then sell its products.

But then, the achievement is not there.
Lyudmil Tsvetkov
Posts: 6052
Joined: Tue Jun 12, 2012 12:41 pm

Re: AlphaZero beats AlphaGo Zero, Stockfish, and Elmo

Post by Lyudmil Tsvetkov »

MikeGL wrote:
clumma wrote:
Lyudmil Tsvetkov wrote:Alpha had considerable hardware advantage
... but that has got to be near saturation.

-Carl
Excellent point.

I mean at that hardware, there won't be any fluctuation on the best candidate move by SF8 anyway.
Alpha hardware equivalent was somewhere 1024 standard cores.
How 1024 cores compare with 64 cores?
How scientific is that.

I don't know what saturation you are talking about, from what I read, without fully understanding it, the TPUs are a very different architecture and quite differently affected by general computer chess concepts.
User avatar
fern
Posts: 8755
Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2006 4:07 pm

Re: AlphaZero beats AlphaGo Zero, Stockfish, and Elmo

Post by fern »

so chess is doomed
and in 25 years, us.
kranium
Posts: 2129
Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 10:43 am

Re: AlphaZero beats AlphaGo Zero, Stockfish, and Elmo

Post by kranium »

Lyudmil Tsvetkov wrote:
clumma wrote:
Lyudmil Tsvetkov wrote:Alpha had considerable hardware advantage
That comparison is not straightforward, but this claim does not seem to be true. SF had 64 threads. I'm not up on the latest scaling behavior of the engine but that has got to be near saturation.

-Carl
From what I gleaned from hardware comparisons, the advantage is 16/1.
Why would one want to run a similar very unfair match?
Only one thing comes to mind: that the company will want to advertise its colossal breakthrough with TPUs and artificial intelligence and then sell its products.

But then, the achievement is not there.
The fact that Google has created a chess playing entity that crushes SF is notable (and fascinating).

TPUs are not for sale, and (at the moment) are applied only to Googles deep learning and research projects,
except when Google donates them to research for free.

https://techcrunch.com/2017/05/17/the-t ... cientists/
Milos
Posts: 4190
Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 1:47 am

Re: AlphaZero beats AlphaGo Zero, Stockfish, and Elmo

Post by Milos »

Rémi Coulom wrote:
Milos wrote:4 hours my ass (pardon my french). Try training it on state-of-the-art 1080.
Fully trained network requres 12h on 5000 gen1 TPUs for self-games and 64 gen2 TPUs for training itself.
Gen1 TPU is like 30x K80 which is like 5x 1080 in performance.
So you'd need like 375k training days with 1080, which is like 1000 years!!!
Your math is wrong. I think it is doable with a distributed effort smaller than what was used for Stockfish.
Care to elaborate, add any substance beyond your one-liner childish reply?
clumma
Posts: 186
Joined: Fri Oct 10, 2014 10:05 pm
Location: Berkeley, CA

Re: AlphaZero beats AlphaGo Zero, Stockfish, and Elmo

Post by clumma »

Milos wrote:4 hours my ass (pardon my french).
Far fewer transistors and joules were used training AlphaZero than have been used training Stockfish. You can soon rent those TPUs on Google's cloud, or apply for free access now, so stop complaining. Furthermore it's an experimental project in early days and performance is obviously not optimal, so all the 'but-but-but 30 Elo because they used SF 8 instead of SF 8.00194' sounds really dumb.

Days of alpha-beta engines have come to an abrupt end.

-Carl