Since some days i enjoy AI analysis of my games and combined with playing against (stronger) bots i really think the fuseki part of my game improved.
For the midgame or intense fights this does not hold, though. Reviewing my games (against humans, too), the moves loosing the fewest points often lead to paths into a multi step rabbit hole where at the end th AI says: so, after playing all this correctly this is a beautiful seki, now go elsewhere.
I think a real teacher would never advise such moves - they are just not relevant at my level of understanding.
Don’t you think there must be some kind of “difficulty” that can be attached to a move computed by the AI. Somehow depending on the depth (indicating the reading complexity) or the width of the tree (indicating that you are not forced to a single path or doomed) until situation is settled?
My definition would be: a move is easy for a 5k if an AI trained on 5k games would get the correct followup 90% of the time against the strongest version of Katago. So we need two AIs to rate the difficulty of a move. So far such a combination of AIs doesn’t exist, so in the meantime we can just look at the AI’s suggestion, play out variations and determine by ourselves if we understand the move. If we don’t, then forget it, there are plenty of other mistakes to study.
Currently I review my games with AI-sensei. It’s not perfect since it still suggests moves that I find hard to understand, and misses smaller mistakes that I could understand more easily, but the tool is useful since I can practice spaced repetition with its help.
Yes I’ve already taken courses with 7d players, who sometimes suggested moves that were not optimal according to AI, but easier to understand for me.
I think getting the AI to do the analysis is probably signficantly cheaper (even more or less free) than getting a human to do it, and the human likely won’t review every move and every mistake in every game, at any time of the day.
That’s true and without doubt a good solution for let’s say 1 to 5 games a month. When at let’s say 2 or 1k or so I certainly will look for a sensei.
I am talking about sometimes 5 games a day, practicing a certain position and trying to get immediate, simple feedback.
Interesting idea. But there must be something simpler to judge the complexity of a move. Perhaps the stability of the result within a certain depth. A great dispersion comes with a great risk.
Stability looks like a good idea: a move is easy if the sequence consisting of top policy moves is still optimal, or almost optimal, whatever the number of playouts (say between 1 and 10000), and at each step, the best move has much higher policy than other moves.
In other words, the intuitive move is still the best move (or almost) after reading, and there is one move which is clearly better than all other moves.
However, here is a position that I found difficult for other reasons.
In the game I was Black, and played G because I was afraid to die if my opponent plays J6. That was a 6-8 mistake according to AI (depending on the AI and on the number of playouts). The basic version of AI-sensei suggests better moves A, B, C, D, E. My local version of Katago (only 15 blocks without GPU, so not the best) says that top policy moves are A and F, but after thinking for a few thousand playouts, it prefers H, then prefers F again.
So the first move was not completely obvious according to criteria above. However from a human point of view, I did consider move A during the game, so that move was not difficult to find by intuition, but I wasn’t confident to live after that. But if we ask AI to play out the followup, we find this sequence for instance (I selected only top policy moves, except move 4 which was found after more playouts and which I was afraid of):
Nothing difficult, it’s a one-way street from AI point of view, all top policy moves remain good moves after more playouts. It’s just that the sequence was 13 moves long and I didn’t read far enough. And also, not responding to the atari (White 4) is not easy for a human.
It’s not what’s matters. A human teacher can see what I miss and select what he thinks to be the most important for me to improve. He can understand what are my bad habits, my psychological bias, what I miss at most and give me some interesting exercises according to this.
I imagine you could take the katago human-trained neural networks, and use that to review your games with the recommendations being a bit higher than your own level.
This is a position where you should follow the proverb: “force before living.” Note that it’s basically impossible to kill black here, as black has the resources of J6 and F2. Once you know you’re going to be living, first you should play the moves that are giving you extra value first, like H9. I think black should be able to live even if white gets a free move. But if we don’t think so, if nothing else it might be good timing to play D4, because we will live, but FIRST we will force, and maybe there’s something with the D4 push and cut, or with F to threaten to save big.
I used ka train before - back then I could only set the playing strength, but when we now have analysis options, too this would be interesting.
Fact is I switched to a paid account here for a smoother experience between playing and analyzing.Would be great if this feature makes it to the server here.
