Oh I should also mention that in the context of cheating with computers there are more signals to look at than the moves themselves. But that sample size is much larger than a single game or likely even the ~10 games being played in a tournament. With a large enough sample size I believe that top players would be able to tell the difference. > if you were a top player and looking at the moves of an opponent, could you discern if the style was more similar to a top rated human or a top rated computer? Now that chess engines have started to use neural networks in move selection the amount of "computer moves" has decreased noticeably. Humans will just trade off material and go for an easy win. The computer will choose the one requiring the least number of moves even if it requires deep calculation and perfect play. They can also show up when for instance there are multiple checkmates in a position. These normally show up in lines where there are many options of roughly equal value and the computer picks a move that is infinitesimally better but out of 'theme' with the position. There are "computer moves" which stand out vs human players. Hope that helps a bit! So no, there is no very analytical thing, which does mean we need to be a bit careful and leave the option open that Niemann maybe just really liked this move on general grounds, got lucky it worked, and has learned of his previous mistakes. that's so many red flags it would make the CCP proud. None of this is hard evidence, but they are red flags, and if you add that Niemann has been caught before in online chess. Hans Niemann did both of this (too fast and too good) and then after the game was not really able to explain his thought process afterwards. In Online chess, they often use this to grade your moves, and flag you if you go over certain thresholds, especially if you have a lower "rating". So playing too perfect and playing too fast in critical positions are both red flags. A computer doesn't see it that way and might spot "instantly" that this move wins material 7 moves down the road, where even a World Champion will check his analysis before playing that. If you play a move with big consequences (say sacrificing material, or violating a principle) you would generally think longer. A player like Niemann is not really expected to reach that level in a game like this.Ī second point is how much time you spend on each move. In less complex games (like an endgame with fewer pieces) top-10 players can definitely play 20 perfect moves in a row, in an attacking game that's harder. Not a member of this forum, but wanted to help a bit here.įirst off, computers are (especially in complex positions) ridiculously stronger than humans, like your average family car can't keep up with a Ferrari.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |