Hacker News Reader

Comment by Gehinnn | Hacker News Reader

It would be nice to have a chess trainer AI that considers the human factor when evaluating a position.

It's funny that it is relatively easy to beat stockfish when the computer has to play without the queen. But it is quite hard to beat a pro player even with such a strong handicap.

Still, the pro player has absolutely no chance against the engine without an handicap.

Assuming that stockfish runs on a computer that is much faster than what we have today and sees that white can always forcibly win, I wonder if stockfish would immediately resign as black playing against a human, even before the very first move.

View on HN

maiachess.com is "A human-like neural network chess engine" which is trained at 9 skill levels (1100-1900).

>We tested each Maia on 9 sets of 500,000 positions that arose in real human games, one for each rating level between 1100 and 1900. Every Maia made a prediction for every position, and we measured its resulting move-matching accuracy on each set.

>Each Maia captures human style at its targeted skill level. Lower Maias best predict moves played by lower-rated players, whereas higher Maias predict moves made by higher-rated players.

Previously on HN: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25810034

In sufficiently advanced CPU vs. CPU, the Black side would definitely resign on the first move.

However, assuming White has a 10% higher chance of winning in games between 2 Human players, that still leaves a decent margin of error for the White Human side to blunder during the game, so Black CPU wouldn't resign. This is assuming CPU doesn't know about that individual Human's blunder history.

Basically, CPUvCPU would definitely see an instant resign. In HUMvCPU, only the Human should definitely surrender as black. A Black CPU will keep playing in case the Human blunders.

> Black side would definitely resign on the first move.

Glancing at Wikipedia https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/First-move_advantage_in_ches...

This claim seems ahead of consensus? What evidence tells you that black is lost at move 1 rather than drawn?

It was a thought experiment set by the ancestor post for the purpose of discussion. "Assuming that [...] sees that white can always forcibly win"

Ah right I see

> But it is quite hard to beat a pro player even with such a strong handicap.

Don't take this the wrong way, but how good are you, i.e. what is your rating?

imo, any reasonably seasoned player, after handicapping their opponent to be without a queen, should be able to easily win in a relatively straightforward by avoiding blunders and trading off pieces.

You underestimate the amount of traps a strong player could have by making the position complex. Hikaru could beat >2000 rated player in queen odds[1].

[1]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fo8GOAm1E6c

I wonder how different the results would be if the high skilled players didn't know they were playing against Hikaru.

Probably would be the same as playing against alpha zero without knowing and wondering how every good move you play seems to leave you worse off.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com