Eric Jang releases AutoGo codebase reconstructing AlphaGo
Eric Jang released AutoGo, a minimal codebase that reconstructs AlphaGo using current reinforcement-learning frameworks. The project trains Go agents from scratch via Monte Carlo Tree Search, neural-network evaluation, and self-play under Tromp-Taylor rules. A lecture on Dwarkesh Patel’s channel details the PUCT formula and exploration-to-exploitation shift. The ericjang/autogo GitHub repository automates GPU job dispatch and logging for single-researcher workflows. The strongest checkpoint still shows life-and-death errors, with the effort centered on transferable autonomous research methods.
For the last few months I've been working on a from-scratch implementation of AlphaGo, a 2016 AI breakthrough that inspired me to get into deep learning. My casual understanding of AlphaGo was "search-augmented deep neural networks trained with self-play", but I wanted to go deeper and understand it by creating it.
Frontier deep learning research has always been expensive, but any given capability gets cheaper very quickly. In 2026, you no longer need DeepMind's resources to train a strong Go AI - you can vibe code all of it yourself for just a few thousand dollars of rented compute.
It was a huge honor to be invited to teach this with @dwarkesh_sp on @dwarkeshpodcast
I am an AlphaGo & Go apprentice, not a master, so all factual errors in the podcast are mine.
Web version of tutorial: https://evjang.com/2026/04/28/autogo.html Code: https://github.com/ericjang/autogo Play the go bot here: https://autogo.evjang.com/
New blackboard lecture w @ericjang11 He walks through how to build AlphaGo from scratch, but with modern AI tools. Sometimes you understand the future better by stepping backward. AlphaGo is still the cleanest worked example of the primitives of intelligence: search, learning from experience, and self-play. You have to go back to 2017 to get insight into how the more general AIs of the future might learn. Once he explained how AlphaGo works, it gave us the context to have a discussion about how RL works in LLMs and how it could work better – naive policy gradient RL has to figure out which of the 100k+ tokens in your trajectory actually got you the right answer, while AlphaGo’s MCTS suggests a strictly better action every single move, giving you a training target that sidesteps the credit assignment problem. The way humans learn is surely closer to the second. Eric also kickstarted an Autoresearch loop on his project. And it was very interesting to discuss which parts of AI research LLMs can already automate pretty well (implementing and running experiments, optimizing hyperparameters) and which they still struggle with (choosing the right question to investigate next, escaping research dead ends). Informative to all the recent discussion about when we should expect an intelligence explosion, and what it would look like from the inside. Timestamps: 0:00:00 – Basics of Go 0:08:06 – Monte Carlo Tree Search 0:31:53 – What the neural network does 1:00:22 – Self-play 1:25:27 – Alternative RL approaches 1:45:36 – Why doesn’t MCTS work for LLMs 2:00:58 – Off-policy training 2:11:51 – RL is even more information inefficient than you thought 2:22:05 – Automated AI researchers
PS i'm working on some RL envs for automated research based on this. reach out if you're interested
For the last few months I've been working on a from-scratch implementation of AlphaGo, a 2016 AI breakthrough that inspired me to get into deep learning. My casual understanding of AlphaGo was "search-augmented deep neural networks trained with self-play", but I wanted to go deeper and understand it by creating it. Frontier deep learning research has always been expensive, but any given capability gets cheaper very quickly. In 2026, you no longer need DeepMind's resources to train a strong Go AI - you can vibe code all of it yourself for just a few thousand dollars of rented compute. It was a huge honor to be invited to teach this with @dwarkesh_sp on @dwarkeshpodcast I am an AlphaGo & Go apprentice, not a master, so all factual errors in the podcast are mine. Web version of tutorial: https://evjang.com/2026/04/28/autogo.html Code: https://github.com/ericjang/autogo Play the go bot here: https://autogo.evjang.com/
For the last few months I've been working on a from-scratch implementation of AlphaGo, a 2016 AI breakthrough that inspired me to get into deep learning. My casual understanding of AlphaGo was "search-augmented deep neural networks trained with self-play", but I wanted to go deeper and understand it by creating it.
Frontier deep learning research has always been expensive, but any given capability gets cheaper very quickly. In 2026, you no longer need DeepMind's resources to train a strong Go AI - you can vibe code all of it yourself for just a few thousand dollars of rented compute.
It was a huge honor to be invited to teach this with @dwarkesh_sp on @dwarkeshpodcast
I am an AlphaGo & Go apprentice, not a master, so all factual errors in the podcast are mine. For example, I mistakenly say 361 several times when it should be 381 🤦♂️
Web version of tutorial: https://evjang.com/2026/04/28/autogo.html Code: https://github.com/ericjang/autogo Play the go bot here: https://autogo.evjang.com/
New blackboard lecture w @ericjang11 He walks through how to build AlphaGo from scratch, but with modern AI tools. Sometimes you understand the future better by stepping backward. AlphaGo is still the cleanest worked example of the primitives of intelligence: search, learning from experience, and self-play. You have to go back to 2017 to get insight into how the more general AIs of the future might learn. Once he explained how AlphaGo works, it gave us the context to have a discussion about how RL works in LLMs and how it could work better – naive policy gradient RL has to figure out which of the 100k+ tokens in your trajectory actually got you the right answer, while AlphaGo’s MCTS suggests a strictly better action every single move, giving you a training target that sidesteps the credit assignment problem. The way humans learn is surely closer to the second. Eric also kickstarted an Autoresearch loop on his project. And it was very interesting to discuss which parts of AI research LLMs can already automate pretty well (implementing and running experiments, optimizing hyperparameters) and which they still struggle with (choosing the right question to investigate next, escaping research dead ends). Informative to all the recent discussion about when we should expect an intelligence explosion, and what it would look like from the inside. Timestamps: 0:00:00 – Basics of Go 0:08:06 – Monte Carlo Tree Search 0:31:53 – What the neural network does 1:00:22 – Self-play 1:25:27 – Alternative RL approaches 1:45:36 – Why doesn’t MCTS work for LLMs 2:00:58 – Off-policy training 2:11:51 – RL is even more information inefficient than you thought 2:22:05 – Automated AI researchers
New blackboard lecture w @ericjang11
He walks through how to build AlphaGo from scratch, but with modern AI tools.
Sometimes you understand the future better by stepping backward. AlphaGo is still the cleanest worked example of the primitives of intelligence: search, learning from experience, and self-play. You have to go back to 2017 to get insight into how the more general AIs of the future might learn.
Once he explained how AlphaGo works, it gave us the context to have a discussion about how RL works in LLMs and how it could work better – naive policy gradient RL has to figure out which of the 100k+ tokens in your trajectory actually got you the right answer, while AlphaGo’s MCTS suggests a strictly better action every single move, giving you a training target that sidesteps the credit assignment problem. The way humans learn is surely closer to the second.
Eric also kickstarted an Autoresearch loop on his project. And it was very interesting to discuss which parts of AI research LLMs can already automate pretty well (implementing and running experiments, optimizing hyperparameters) and which they still struggle with (choosing the right question to investigate next, escaping research dead ends). Informative to all the recent discussion about when we should expect an intelligence explosion, and what it would look like from the inside.
Timestamps:
0:00:00 – Basics of Go 0:08:06 – Monte Carlo Tree Search 0:31:53 – What the neural network does 1:00:22 – Self-play 1:25:27 – Alternative RL approaches 1:45:36 – Why doesn’t MCTS work for LLMs 2:00:58 – Off-policy training 2:11:51 – RL is even more information inefficient than you thought 2:22:05 – Automated AI researchers
@ericjang11 Watch with video if you can: https://youtu.be/X_ZVSPcZhtw
And check out the flashcards I wrote to retain the insights: https://flashcards.dwarkesh.com/eric-jang/
New blackboard lecture w @ericjang11 He walks through how to build AlphaGo from scratch, but with modern AI tools. Sometimes you understand the future better by stepping backward. AlphaGo is still the cleanest worked example of the primitives of intelligence: search, learning from experience, and self-play. You have to go back to 2017 to get insight into how the more general AIs of the future might learn. Once he explained how AlphaGo works, it gave us the context to have a discussion about how RL works in LLMs and how it could work better – naive policy gradient RL has to figure out which of the 100k+ tokens in your trajectory actually got you the right answer, while AlphaGo’s MCTS suggests a strictly better action every single move, giving you a training target that sidesteps the credit assignment problem. The way humans learn is surely closer to the second. Eric also kickstarted an Autoresearch loop on his project. And it was very interesting to discuss which parts of AI research LLMs can already automate pretty well (implementing and running experiments, optimizing hyperparameters) and which they still struggle with (choosing the right question to investigate next, escaping research dead ends). Informative to all the recent discussion about when we should expect an intelligence explosion, and what it would look like from the inside. Timestamps: 0:00:00 – Basics of Go 0:08:06 – Monte Carlo Tree Search 0:31:53 – What the neural network does 1:00:22 – Self-play 1:25:27 – Alternative RL approaches 1:45:36 – Why doesn’t MCTS work for LLMs 2:00:58 – Off-policy training 2:11:51 – RL is even more information inefficient than you thought 2:22:05 – Automated AI researchers
@dwarkesh_sp @ericjang11 You are winning with this format. Excellent videos!
New blackboard lecture w @ericjang11 He walks through how to build AlphaGo from scratch, but with modern AI tools. Sometimes you understand the future better by stepping backward. AlphaGo is still the cleanest worked example of the primitives of intelligence: search, learning from experience, and self-play. You have to go back to 2017 to get insight into how the more general AIs of the future might learn. Once he explained how AlphaGo works, it gave us the context to have a discussion about how RL works in LLMs and how it could work better – naive policy gradient RL has to figure out which of the 100k+ tokens in your trajectory actually got you the right answer, while AlphaGo’s MCTS suggests a strictly better action every single move, giving you a training target that sidesteps the credit assignment problem. The way humans learn is surely closer to the second. Eric also kickstarted an Autoresearch loop on his project. And it was very interesting to discuss which parts of AI research LLMs can already automate pretty well (implementing and running experiments, optimizing hyperparameters) and which they still struggle with (choosing the right question to investigate next, escaping research dead ends). Informative to all the recent discussion about when we should expect an intelligence explosion, and what it would look like from the inside. Timestamps: 0:00:00 – Basics of Go 0:08:06 – Monte Carlo Tree Search 0:31:53 – What the neural network does 1:00:22 – Self-play 1:25:27 – Alternative RL approaches 1:45:36 – Why doesn’t MCTS work for LLMs 2:00:58 – Off-policy training 2:11:51 – RL is even more information inefficient than you thought 2:22:05 – Automated AI researchers
Awesome.
Seriously, people are harsh with this platform, but if you are careful with whom you follow, it is a constant stream of awesomness.
For the last few months I've been working on a from-scratch implementation of AlphaGo, a 2016 AI breakthrough that inspired me to get into deep learning. My casual understanding of AlphaGo was "search-augmented deep neural networks trained with self-play", but I wanted to go deeper and understand it by creating it. Frontier deep learning research has always been expensive, but any given capability gets cheaper very quickly. In 2026, you no longer need DeepMind's resources to train a strong Go AI - you can vibe code all of it yourself for just a few thousand dollars of rented compute. It was a huge honor to be invited to teach this with @dwarkesh_sp on @dwarkeshpodcast I am an AlphaGo & Go apprentice, not a master, so all factual errors in the podcast are mine. Web version of tutorial: https://evjang.com/2026/04/28/autogo.html Code: https://github.com/ericjang/autogo Play the go bot here: https://autogo.evjang.com/
@dwarkesh_sp @ericjang11 was glossed over but the UCB proof is really simple + kinda cute. after K samples of an action, you have some variance of your mean estimate wrt true mean, which goes down exp in K -> high-conf window
regret guarantee = the true mean is in the window for each, w/ prob 1 - eps
New blackboard lecture w @ericjang11 He walks through how to build AlphaGo from scratch, but with modern AI tools. Sometimes you understand the future better by stepping backward. AlphaGo is still the cleanest worked example of the primitives of intelligence: search, learning from experience, and self-play. You have to go back to 2017 to get insight into how the more general AIs of the future might learn. Once he explained how AlphaGo works, it gave us the context to have a discussion about how RL works in LLMs and how it could work better – naive policy gradient RL has to figure out which of the 100k+ tokens in your trajectory actually got you the right answer, while AlphaGo’s MCTS suggests a strictly better action every single move, giving you a training target that sidesteps the credit assignment problem. The way humans learn is surely closer to the second. Eric also kickstarted an Autoresearch loop on his project. And it was very interesting to discuss which parts of AI research LLMs can already automate pretty well (implementing and running experiments, optimizing hyperparameters) and which they still struggle with (choosing the right question to investigate next, escaping research dead ends). Informative to all the recent discussion about when we should expect an intelligence explosion, and what it would look like from the inside. Timestamps: 0:00:00 – Basics of Go 0:08:06 – Monte Carlo Tree Search 0:31:53 – What the neural network does 1:00:22 – Self-play 1:25:27 – Alternative RL approaches 1:45:36 – Why doesn’t MCTS work for LLMs 2:00:58 – Off-policy training 2:11:51 – RL is even more information inefficient than you thought 2:22:05 – Automated AI researchers
@dwarkesh_sp @ericjang11 Thanks for doing these man
New blackboard lecture w @ericjang11 He walks through how to build AlphaGo from scratch, but with modern AI tools. Sometimes you understand the future better by stepping backward. AlphaGo is still the cleanest worked example of the primitives of intelligence: search, learning from experience, and self-play. You have to go back to 2017 to get insight into how the more general AIs of the future might learn. Once he explained how AlphaGo works, it gave us the context to have a discussion about how RL works in LLMs and how it could work better – naive policy gradient RL has to figure out which of the 100k+ tokens in your trajectory actually got you the right answer, while AlphaGo’s MCTS suggests a strictly better action every single move, giving you a training target that sidesteps the credit assignment problem. The way humans learn is surely closer to the second. Eric also kickstarted an Autoresearch loop on his project. And it was very interesting to discuss which parts of AI research LLMs can already automate pretty well (implementing and running experiments, optimizing hyperparameters) and which they still struggle with (choosing the right question to investigate next, escaping research dead ends). Informative to all the recent discussion about when we should expect an intelligence explosion, and what it would look like from the inside. Timestamps: 0:00:00 – Basics of Go 0:08:06 – Monte Carlo Tree Search 0:31:53 – What the neural network does 1:00:22 – Self-play 1:25:27 – Alternative RL approaches 1:45:36 – Why doesn’t MCTS work for LLMs 2:00:58 – Off-policy training 2:11:51 – RL is even more information inefficient than you thought 2:22:05 – Automated AI researchers