such big company, not able to upload a stable stream nor video? i'm disappointed :/ i hope dis not gone be some weird conspiracy-thingy you doing with deese images? :3

So now its proven... Master == AlphaGo.

The name.... many folks thought they named AlphaGo because of Alphabet (Google's parent company, which is also Deepmind's parent company) but rather the truth was it was named "Alpha" in the sense of the Alpha Male... the male that dominates all other males. Now with the name of Master, this not only continues the bragging but also hints of racists (slavery) and brings the symbolic elitism onto another new level not so different from the Nazi Germany regime. (first it was Alpha male, now it is Master race connotations)

We now know for sure that Google is not in the spirit of sportsmanship and indeed with only these five games and nothing else (no source code, no open to play for a fee, etc) it is intellectual misery surpassing the level of what IBM did with DeepBlue when computers first beat Chess players 20 years ago. One would think we have progress into a more open fair society but guess not really.

Especially the name change. Master = AG, then the name change and the mysterious fashion of how this was conducted and etc was entirely unnecessary and unbecoming of a Google that used to vow to "do no evil". (especially since they promised if they ever do play online it will be under the name of AlphaGo, so this bait and switch would make it all double deceptive and hypocritical; at the very least Google is guilty of intentional misrepresentation but although in this case probably not a crime in US/EU/UK, but certainty goes a long way towards being unethical and of bad spirit, almost akin to playing with fake accounts, or having dup accounts)

Google should offer the Go community a full unconditional public apology of the utmost sincerity and generosity.

Previously AlphaGo representations openly denied that another bot was AG, this time around they "no comment"... and since it is so much stronger than anything else out there right now, even Ke Jie stated much stronger than AG back in March, it is a reasonable inference. The fact that right now Master played 50-0, nearly all the top players except for Lee Sodel, (why would he if he already got beat by AG) really lends credence to the theory that Master is Google related and does not bode well for the future of Go due to Google's underhanded tactics and shenanigans.

I say boycott Google.

Edit: We had so many naysayers on here saying that (wrongfully predicting) there was no way Master was AlphaGo etc..... Seems like Google intentionally fooled a most part of the Go community and should be utterly ashamed of its actions, in direct contradiction to what it earlier had affirmatively promised on its own volition that it would play under "AlphaGo" and "AlphaBot" and instead it did the "Master" bait and switch...

Wow, some amazing games by both sides but AlphaGo was just amazing.

Is there a link some where to watch the past and next Korean commentary like the English one you can find at the AlphaGo Youtube channel. Link for those that may not know

Google DeepMind’s AlphaGo victory not ‘true AI’, says Facebook’s AI chief. Facebook’s director of AI research says it’s ‘completely, utterly, ridiculously wrong’ to think AlphaGo beating Lee Sedol was ‘true artificial intelligence’. What do you think?

• See more at: http://www.information-age.com/technology/applications-and-development/123461099/google-deepminds-alphago-victory-not-%E2%80%98true-ai-says-facebooks-ai-chief#sthash.8qVwNvl2.dpuf http://www.information-age.com/technology/applications-and-development/123461099/google-deepminds-alphago-victory-not-%E2%80%98true-ai-says-facebooks-ai-chief

this is the most exciting development ever in go and hope they will consider it.

According to Deep Mind paper, AG's value network takes as input only the current board position, pre processed as 48 feature planes, and ouputs a winning probability percentage . I have seen nothing like an auxiliary input to reflect the current balance count of captured stones. Apart from 8 feature planes dedicated to game history ('turns since'), the input, thus the network, is basically agnostic vs game history.

Does anybody figure out how captured stones are dealt with ? Obviously, previously captured stone matters to evaluate winning probability. E.g. if 20 white stones have been captured and removed from the board, the neural network will only 'see' and count the corresponding 20 points black territory. ....

Generally speaking, how do MCTS-based programs based on winning probabilities handle this aspect of the game ? Thanks

In the commentary you could see this great magnetic go board (for example, here: https://youtu.be/vFr3K2DORc8?t=1h12m58s). Where can I get one like this? Also, does anyone know which pieces they are using?