by Milos » Tue Jul 31, 2018 11:17 am
MCTS, UCT, noise at root, everything, the entire executable program, EVERYTHING, is (C) Leela authors, who, judging by their talkchess posts this evening, are distinctly unhappy with this clone entry into TCEC.
Doing _hard_ work does not constitute doing _original_ work. Ask any painter that forgers Michelangelo or Andy Warhol paintings - it’s _really_ difficult. Compare to someone downloading an open source NN program that predicts future NYSE stock prices who adopts it to predict prices on instead, say, the Frankfurt exchange by adjusting dollar to euro rates, different data sources, cleanup, normalisation etc. If the original program is open source, you can do that but you can’t claim it is _original_ work because it is _derived_ work. Readup on GPL v2 or v3.
I’m sure you spent a good amount of time adjusting LC0 to take training data from a large dataset of best human play, cleaning it, normalising it to fit LZ0 input layer requirements and what not - and probably tweaked many hyper parameters (even net configuration) to adjust to a smaller training set. That is not easy (but not that hard for a programmer either - just takes time) - well done! But if you based your code on LZ0 it is NOT original work. To anyone that says that the NN config/hyper parameters and tweaking is the _hard_ / _important_ part I can only say - ”Then write the easy parts yourself and do not take code from LC0 - really, it is OK, just don't take other peoples work and claim its yours.”
Anyway, unless you very carefully isolated those modification you made you are obliged to submit any changes back to the Leila and LZ0 projects (some argue that it is not even enough to isolate your own work unless LZ0 has an LGPL license (the Library GPL)).
That said, I think it would be very interesting to see a NN trained on human play in TCEC and see some (KC?) analysis of play. Just wished it had been done in a less narcissistic fashion. Why isn't the code published on GitHub or anywhere else? And that TCEC intervju gave me the creeps, is this the next self appointed bitcoin tycoon?
PS. I’ve been doing NN design, research, tweaking and hair-tearing, frustrating work for decades. But always been very clear about giving credits were it’s due - alas, we are all standing on the shoulders of those before us. Leechers, be aware!
According to other chess forums, ZeusX is a Leela clone trained on a Megabase of human games. How that counts, in any real sense of the term as, "developed by" is beyond comprehension.
..
According to other chess forums, ZeusX is a Leela clone trained on a Megabase of human games. How that counts, in any real sense of the term as, "developed by" is beyond comprehension.
Here's commentary from other forum ...................
Milos wrote: ↑Tue Jul 31, 2018 2:03 am
Graham Banks wrote: ↑Tue Jul 31, 2018 1:33 am
Nay Lin Tun wrote: ↑Sun Jul 29, 2018 3:58 pm
Graham Banks wrote: ↑Sun Jul 29, 2018 6:30 am
What about Tencent company?
https://www.chess.com/forum/view/genera ... -season-13
http://www.chessdom.com/deus-x-the-nn-c ... rt-silver/
My God, what a load of BS. I would think that submitting main engine and then it's tweaked clone is something that wouldn't be allowed by TCEC rules, but apparently it it going to be.
For once I have to agree, that's pathetic and ridiculous at the same time.
But that was already clear from the first cryptic announcements though.
The most work done was to find a new name...
ASilverheute um 06:08 Uhr
It is a 100% unique NN built entirely from human games, and only human games, from Megabase 2018. No self-play, or anything else. It is 10x128 for any curious.
That was the philosophy behind it.
From other forum:
Armstrongheute um 06:09 Uhr
Sorry for my naive question . Not gone through the video . If Deus in agreement with the open source policies of Leela ?
ASilverheute um 06:09 Uhr
What open source policies? I am not selling it.
Now you can start with dozens of Brainfish clones (with different self constructed 'cerebellum' books) and dozens of LeelaChess clones with
self-trained NNs. Brave new world.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google Groups "LCZero" group.
To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/topic/lczero/vGdNYW-Ou58/unsubscribe.
To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to lczero+un...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lczero/827d2f95-fc7e-48e1-b0cc-9a3fef27176b%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lczero/77d22084-cdd6-41e5-89ae-ceb77995f8ac%40googlegroups.com.
It all boils down to the question what's the essence and what's the boilerplate. As long as we agree that strength of Leela is mainly given by what the network has learned, the code itself and the implementation falls to the boilerplate level along with the libraries the project uses, the interpreter, the system, and the hardware it all runs on. Obviously, Leela authors spent a lot of time writing their code because it's not readily available elsewhere. But if NNs become widespread, I expect graphic cards might be coming with NN learning and MCTS tools straight from card manufacturers eventually.The Leela vs DeusX comparison is essentially "supervised learning vs self-learning". Assuming DeusX is indeed only trained on human games. There's plenty of patterns for supervised learning available, but new ones are not coming in at too great rate. Self-learning has potential to surpass that, given just enough time.
by IQ » Thu Aug 02, 2018 10:04 am
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "LCZero" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lczero+un...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lczero/4a279bba-4ef6-417d-ba0a-e4951ccb882b%40googlegroups.com.
Not touching the question whether Lc0 + alternative nets should be allowed at TCEC.I know that that DeusX confusion is resolved now, but just to state my opinion for the record:It is clear to me that failing to acknowledge usage of LCZero in the interview and announcement is not an oversight of some kind, but a deliberate attempt to hide the fact that it's derived from LCZero work, and to exaggerate an own share of work in the "DeusX" project. Simply speaking, it was more cheating than misunderstanding.
ASilver keeps telling that he described everything "perfectly clear" to Anton (TCEC admin), but given that I saw that interview, I strongly suspect that it was not so perfectly clear.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lczero/CACGjmsJbqgS1F-Keg-yTz-qSzjzey-aBNTFVdd-jkTwzPD9HFw%40mail.gmail.com.
(Getting even a midsized software company to make this documentation is hard enough, maybe asking a small opensource project to do it is a bit much)
"The heart of the program is if then commands and not numbers that you change and I think that is absurd to call Deus a different engine."
I think the only way that would be legal would be if it also included the source code and the standard GPL. Otherwise not. There's a reason MacOS is built on top of Unix rather than Linux.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "LCZero" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lczero+un...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lczero/7391d8a0-f4b2-435b-9498-2ca239cdce87%40googlegroups.com.